Alexander Ledvina v. Warden C. Harrison

No. 2:25-cv-02097-TLP-cgc (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 23, 2026) · United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee · March 23, 2026 · No. No. 2:25-cv-02097-TLP-cgc

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee granted Alexander Ledvina leave to supplement his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, denied his motion to expedite as moot, and granted the respondent’s motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the petition without prejudice because Ledvina failed to exhaust the Bureau of Prisons’ administrative remedies concerning the calculation of First Step Act time credits. The court also concluded that the petition would fail on the merits, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Holdings

  1. Leave to supplement the pleading was granted because the proposed supplement concerned the same alleged error in the BOP's calculation of First Step Act time credits.
  2. A federal prisoner generally must exhaust available BOP administrative remedies before seeking relief under § 2241, and Ledvina had not properly completed that process.
  3. Ledvina did not show that the BOP's use of a violent-offense code for his PATTERN assessment or its resulting First Step Act time-credit calculation was arbitrary or capricious; the petition would therefore fail on the merits.
  4. Leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal was denied because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should allow Ledvina to supplement his § 2241 petition with allegations concerning a second PATTERN assessment.
  2. Whether the § 2241 petition should be dismissed because Ledvina failed to exhaust available BOP administrative remedies.
  3. Whether the BOP's classification of Ledvina's firearm offenses as violent offenses for PATTERN purposes was arbitrary or capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
  4. Whether Ledvina should be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

Disposition

dismissed

Cases Cited (15)

  • United States v. Ledvina, 166 F.4th 716, 717 (8th Cir. 2026)(cited)
  • Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)(cited)
  • Phila. Indem. Ins. Co. v. Youth Alive, Inc., 732 F.3d 645, 649 (6th Cir. 2013)(cited)
  • Mediacom Se. LLC v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., 672 F.3d 396, 399 (6th Cir. 2012)(cited)
  • Rondigo, L.L.C. v. Twp. of Richmond, 641 F.3d 673, 680 (6th Cir. 2011)(cited)
  • Bassett v. Nat'l Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 528 F.3d 426, 430 (6th Cir. 2008)(cited)
  • Little v. Hopkins, 638 F.2d 953, 953-54 (6th Cir. 1981)(followed)
  • Cooper v. Batts, No. 21-5828, 2022 WL 4009862, at *2 (6th Cir. Aug. 25, 2022)(followed)
  • Fazzini v. Ne. Ohio Corr. Ctr., 473 F.3d 229, 236 (6th Cir. 2006)(followed)
  • Danmola v. Goldey, No. CIV-23-825-G, 2024 WL 4718913, at *2 (W.D. Okla. Sept. 18, 2024), report and recommendation adopted, 2024 WL 4715106 (W.D. Okla. Nov. 7, 2024)(distinguished)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…