Summary
This memorandum opinion and order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky addresses a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court finds that the petitioner has not exhausted his required administrative remedies within the Federal Bureau of Prisons grievance process before seeking judicial relief. Consequently, the court denies the petition without prejudice and dismisses the action, instructing the petitioner to complete the administrative steps before potentially filing a new petition.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Abdalla exhausted the required BOP administrative grievance process before filing a §2241 habeas petition.
Holdings
- The petition is denied because Abdalla has not fully exhausted the BOP’s administrative grievance process; where the failure to exhaust is apparent from the face of the pleading, sua sponte dismissal is appropriate.
Key quotations
“In this situation, where a petitioner's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies is apparent from the face of the pleading itself, sua sponte dismissal is appropriate. See Kenney v. Ormond, No. 17-5889 (6th Cir. May 7, 2018).”
Factual background
Albert Abdalla is incarcerated at USP‑McCreary in Pine Knot, Kentucky. He filed a habeas petition claiming the Federal Bureau of Prisons failed to timely transfer him to community placement. He had only completed the initial BP‑8 grievance form and had not pursued the subsequent BP‑9, BP‑10, or BP‑11 stages.
Procedural history
Abdalla filed a §2241 habeas petition pro se alleging BOP failed to transfer him to community placement. The district court denied the petition, finding he had not exhausted the BOP's multi‑tiered administrative grievance process.
Remand instructions
Petitioner may file a new habeas petition after fully exhausting the BP‑8 through BP‑11 administrative grievance process.