��ʮ���²����

Although 49 U.S.C. § 46110 “grants exclusive jurisdiction to the federal courts of appeals to ‘review' the ‘order[s]’ of a number of agencies, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),” a federal court of appeals does not have original jurisdiction when a petitioner seeks the relief of being removed from the Consolidated Terrorist Screening Database, or “watchlist,” through TSA, because the watchlist is “maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center,” and § 46110 “does not grant the circuit courts the jurisdiction to review TSC orders, the statute cannot grant jurisdiction over claims seeking removal from the [watchlist].”

Raymond Arjmand appealed a determination letter he received from the Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”). The TSA determination letter denied Arjmand’s request to disclose whether his name was on the Consolidated Terrorist Screening Database (“watchlist”), and if so, that his name be removed. The TSA letter indicated that Arjmand could appeal to a federal circuit court pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 46110, a statute that “grants exclusive jurisdiction to the federal courts of appeals to ‘review' the 'order[s]’ of a number of agencies, including the Transportation Security Administration.” The Ninth Circuit held that the relief Arjmand requested does not fall within a circuit court’s original jurisdiction because the watchlist is “maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), a multi-agency federal government center administered by the FBI,” not TSA. The panel reaffirmed its holding in Latif v. Holder that “since § 46110 does not grant the circuit courts the jurisdiction to review TSC orders, the statute cannot grant jurisdiction over claims seeking removal from the [watchlist].” Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, the panel transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. TRANSFERRED.