Tennigkeit

Tennigkeit v. Taylor

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 26, 202524-6322California379 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 26 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TYLER MAXWELL TENNIGKEIT, No. 24-6322 D.C. No. 1:24-cv-01057-JLT-SKO Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MEMORANDUM*

TAYLOR, Warden, FCI Mendota,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Jennifer L. Thurston, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 18, 2025**

Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Tyler Maxwell Tennigkeit appeals pro se from the district

court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing de novo, see

Lane v. Swain, 910 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir. 2018), we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Tennigkeit contends that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.