Phillip Martinez v. United States Parole Commission W.H. Seifert, Warden, Metropolitan Detention Center

46 F.3d 1143 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Phillip MARTINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; W.H. Seifert, Warden, Metropolitan Detention Center, Respondents-Appellees. Nos. 94-55678, 94-55778. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 11, 1995. Decided Jan. 23, 1995. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HALL and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Phillip Martinez, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of two 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241 petitions. Martinez contends the district court erred when it dismissed his petitions, without prejudice, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review de novo. Grady v. Crabtree, 958 F.2d 874, 874 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). We affirm in part, vacate in part and remand. 3 Before the merits of a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241 petition can be addressed, a federal prisoner must exhaust available…