The opinion of the court was delivered by: CHARLES WEINER, Senior District Judge
Terry Miller, a prisoner in federal custody, filed a petition
for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Miller
claims he has satisfied his sentence, but that the Bureau of
Prisons improperly failed to award him credit for time served.
Respondents argue that venue in this District is improper, and
that petitioner has failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
Additionally, respondents argue that Miller was properly
allocated credit for all time served. We conclude that venue is
proper, but that Miller has failed to exhaust administrative
remedies. Accordingly, we find it prudent to dismiss the petition
without prejudice to permit Miller to complete the exhaustion process.
Initially, respondents argue that venue is improper because
Miller is currently confined at FCI Cumberland, Maryland The
transfer of a habeas petitioner to another judicial district,
after the filing of the petition, does not defeat the original
District Court's jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Ex
Parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283, 304 (1944); Ex Parte
Catanzaro, 138 F.2d 100 (3d Cir. 1943), Chavez-Rivas v. Olsen,
194 F. Supp.2d 368, 371 (D.N.J. 2002). Although petitioner is
currently confined in Maryland, he was confined at the Federal
Detention Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania when he originally
filed his petition. Therefore, we find that venue is appropriate.
Nonetheless, we conclude that petitioner has failed to exhaust
administrative remedies. The Bureau of Prisons has established a
system whereby federal prisoners may seek formal review of any
aspect of their imprisonment. See 28 C.F.R. § 542.10.
Additionally, a federal prisoner is required to exhaust all
administrative remedies before petitioning for a writ of habeas
corpus. See Moscato v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 98 F.2d 757, 760
(3d Cir. 1996) (citing Bradshaw v. Carlson, 682 F.2d 1050,1052
(3d Cir. 1981). A federal court may dismiss a prisoner's petition
for writ of habeas corpus for failing to exhaust all
administrative remedies. See U.S. v. Chavez-Gavina, 2002 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 4035, *2 (E.D.Pa. 2002) (citing Arias v. U.S. Parole Com., 648 F.2d 196, 199 (3d Cir. 1981).
In the current case, Miller is challenging the computation of
his sentence. Although Miller filed an administrative grievance
in 1992, there is nothing to suggest that he raised the specific
allegation he raises in the instant petition. Thus, the Bureau
has not been afforded the opportunity to review this claim. As
this unexhausted claim raises issues of fact to be determined by
administrative agencies, we find the failure to exhaust cannot be
excused. See generally Arias, 648 F.2d at 199.
The motion of Terry Miller for summary judgment is DENIED.
The petition of Terry Miller for writ of habeas corpus is
DISMISSED without prejudice to it being renewed after all
administrative remedies have been exhausted.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw ...