From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Adler

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 18, 2011
No. 10-15820 (9th Cir. Jul. 18, 2011)

Opinion

No. 10-15820.

Submitted July 12, 2011.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

July 18, 2011.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Anthony W. Ishii, Chief Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 1:08-cv-01566-AWI.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Federal prisoner Wilson Thomas appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition as moot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm the district court.

Thomas contends that the district court erred by dismissing his habeas petition seeking immediate consideration for transfer into a Residential Reentry Center ("RRC"). The record reflects that the district court did not err when it dismissed the petition because the Bureau of Prisons has eliminated the policy Thomas challenged in his petition. In addition, at the time of the district court's decision, Thomas had already received an individualized consideration for RRC placement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621(b) and 3624(c), and Rodriguez v. Smith, 541 F.3d 1180, 1184-89 (9th Cir. 2008).

Thomas's remaining contentions are unavailing.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Adler

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 18, 2011
No. 10-15820 (9th Cir. Jul. 18, 2011)
Case details for

Thomas v. Adler

Case Details

Full title:WILSON THOMAS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. NEIL H. ADLER, Warden; TAFT C.I.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 18, 2011

Citations

No. 10-15820 (9th Cir. Jul. 18, 2011)