United States v. Warden
- 7:25-cv-06172
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In United States v. Warden, the court dismissed the petition without prejudice because administrative remedies had not been exhausted.
The petitioner, whose petition was dismissed without prejudice, and the Warden, the named defendant; the case was closed.
What happened
In United States v. Warden, the petitioner asked the federal court to consider his petition, but the judgment says he had not shown that he completed the required administrative review process.
The court dismissed the petition without prejudice as unexhausted. That means the dismissal did not bar the petitioner from filing again, although the judgment itself does not describe any future filing requirements.
The court, with no individual judge identified in the judgment, ordered the case closed on September 25, 2025.
The detailed version
- United States v. Warden · No. 7:25-cv-06172
- Sept. 25, 2025
Background
The judgment states that the petitioner had not shown that he exhausted his administrative remedies. It cites a prior decision explaining that prisoners may seek judicial review of the Bureau of Prisons' sentencing determinations after exhausting administrative remedies, but that a district court lacks jurisdiction to compute sentencing credit when the prisoner has not challenged his sentence and has not sought administrative review. The judgment does not otherwise describe the petition's specific requested relief or the petitioner's administrative history.
Ruling
The court dismissed the petition without prejudice as unexhausted. The judgment states that the case was accordingly closed. No individual judge is identified; the document is signed by the clerk of court through a deputy clerk.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.