Nancy A. Blum v. C.E. Floyd, Warden

95 F.3d 1156 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Nancy A. BLUM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. C.E. FLOYD, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 96-15239. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 26, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Nancy A. Blum, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction. We review de novo, Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 982 (1988), and affirm. 3 Blum contends that the district court erred by dismissing her claim for injunctive relief based on prison officials' alleged threats to transfer Blum to another prison. Blum further contends that these threats are in retaliation for her successful pursuit of her administrative remedies. 4 Habeas corpus is the exclusive remedy for a prisoner who challenges the fact or duration of her…