Holger Kreuzhage v. Clifford E. Floyd, Warden U.S. Parole Commission

15 F.3d 1086 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Holger KREUZHAGE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Clifford E. FLOYD, Warden; U.S. Parole Commission, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55726. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 18, 1994. * Decided Jan. 21, 1994. Before: REINHARDT, O'SCANNLAIN and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Holger Kreuzhage, a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241 habeas petition. He contends that the United States Parole Commission erred in establishing his parole release date. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because this action is moot. See Reimers v. Oregon, 863 F.2d 630, 632 (9th Cir.1988). 3 Where a federal prisoner seeks release on parole and does not challenge the validity of his original conviction, his Sec. 2241 petition becomes moot once he is released on parole. Fendler v. United States Bureau of Prisons, 846 F.2d 550, 555 (9th…