Stevenson v. Eischen
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:25-cv-01308
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 8
In Stevenson v. Eischen, Judge Bullard recommended denying the habeas petition as moot and dismissing the case with prejudice after the BOP restored Stevenson’s credits.
Michael Stevenson, whose challenge to his First Step Act eligibility and time credits was recommended for denial as moot; the Bureau of Prisons had already restored his eligibility and applied the credits.
What happened
In Michael Stevenson v. B. Eischen, Michael Stevenson challenged the Bureau of Prisons’ decision to treat him as ineligible for First Step Act time credits and remove credits he had earned.
After the petition was filed, the Bureau of Prisons found Stevenson eligible and credited him with 365 days toward early release and 580 credits toward prerelease custody. Stevenson did not respond to the government’s argument that these actions gave him all the relief he requested.
Judge Elsa M. Bullard recommended denying the petition as moot and dismissing the case with prejudice because no effective relief remained available and no exception to the mootness rule applied. The recommendation was not a final order, and the parties could object within 14 days after being served.
The detailed version
- Stevenson v. Eischen · No. 0:25-cv-01308
- Eric Tostrud
- Feb. 25, 2026
Background
Michael Stevenson filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging the Bureau of Prisons’ determination that he was ineligible for time credits under the First Step Act. Stevenson alleged that he had been eligible to earn those credits since beginning his sentence in 2019. The First Step Act allows eligible federal prisoners who complete qualifying recidivism-reduction programs to earn credits that can reduce their sentence or move up their eligibility for prerelease custody.
In December 2024, a Bureau of Prisons counselor told Stevenson that his status was changing from eligible to ineligible and that he would be denied all credits earned up to that point. After Stevenson filed his petition, the Bureau of Prisons reconsidered his eligibility. It found that he was eligible and had received the maximum allowable 365 days of credits toward early release, along with 580 credits toward prerelease custody. The government argued that this provided all the relief Stevenson sought. Stevenson did not file a reply to that argument.
Mootness analysis
The court explained that federal courts may decide only live cases or controversies in which effective relief remains available. When later events resolve the dispute, the case is moot, and the court cannot decide the merits because its decision would be advisory. The court concluded that the Bureau of Prisons’ revised determination and application of credits resolved the issue raised in Stevenson’s petition.
The court considered four possible exceptions to mootness: continuing collateral injuries, a wrong capable of repetition while evading review, voluntary cessation of challenged conduct, and a properly certified class action. It concluded that none applied. Stevenson identified no legally recognized continuing injury; he could file a new petition if a future recalculation occurred under new circumstances; there was no indication that the Bureau of Prisons changed its decision merely to obtain dismissal; and Stevenson filed only an individual petition, not a class action.
Recommendation
Judge Elsa M. Bullard recommended that Stevenson’s § 2241 petition be denied as moot and that the case be dismissed with prejudice. The document is a report and recommendation, not a final district-court order or judgment, and it states that it was not directly appealable to the Eighth Circuit. The parties could file specific written objections within 14 days after being served.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.