ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Petitioner, at the time of filing his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on *689 September 12, 1968, pursuant to 28 U.S. C. § 2241, 1 was in Federal custody as a mandatory release violator (i. e., parole violator). While the Court was awaiting the filing of the various responsive pleadings upon its Order to Show Cause, petitioner was mandatorily released from Federal custody under 18 U.S.C. § 4164 2 and became a parolee thereunder on March 20, 1969. Before considering petitioner’s contentions, it would be beneficial to summarize the relevant facts:

Upon his conviction for interstate transportation of securities in 1959, petitioner was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and five years’ probation. In 1965, while still in Federal prison, he was convicted and received an additional consecutive sentence of eighteen months and three years’ probation for mail fraud. In the same year a New York State court convicted him and imposed a further one-year sentence for petty larceny, to be served after release from the Federal penitentiary.

On May 30, 1966, due to good-time allowances, petitioner was mandatorily released from Federal custody, under parole status, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4164 . This release took place at Federal Detention Headquarters in New York City, to which petitioner had been transferred from the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. At the time of this mandatory release, petitioner was taken into State custody and he commenced serving the previously imposed New York State court sentence for the petty larceny conviction.

In January 1967, petitioner was released by the New York authorities. He then absconded from his previously imposed Federal parole supervision in July 1967, and was returned to Federal prison as a mandatory release (i. e., parole) violator in January 1968.

Petitioner contends that he is entitled to have credit for the time served in State custody — seven months and twenty-eight days — applied against his original Federal sentence and present parole status; and that he thus is entitled to immediate release from the Federal parole restrictions.

After reviewing the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Response, petitioner’s Traverse to respondent’s Response, and the arguments and authori *690 ties set forth by the parties, this Court is fully advised in the premises and thus orders that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied for the following reasons:

Petitioner contends that he was not “released” under the provisions of 18 U. S.C. § 4164, but instead was “transferred” to New York State custody under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 4082 3 , and thus that his Federal sentences were still running while he was in New York State custody. Petitioner primarily relies on 18 U.S.C. § 4281 as support for this contention. That statute provides:

Petitioner contends that since he was not given transportation, suitable clothing, or money upon his release, he was in fact “transferred” and not “released” and thus his terms of Federal custody were not waived, tolled or suspended by the State custody.

Petitioner’s argument is erroneous and clearly without merit. Section 4281 of Title 18, United States Code, does not create a right in the petitioner to be released at any particular place, or in any particular manner. The statute says that the person to be discharged may also be “furnished with transportation * * * to such place * * * as may be authorized by the Attorney General.” This clause, when considered in light of 18 U.S.C. § 4164 certainly evidences no intent to waive, toll or suspend Federal parole jurisdiction. Section 4164 of Title 18, United States Code, provides as follows:

In the instant case, petitioner was transferred from the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, to the Federal Detention Headquarters in New York City pursuant to a detainer issued by the Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. It is clear that the Attorney General had the power to make such a delivery of petitioner; and it is also clear that petitioner was in fact “released” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4164 and not merely “transferred”, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4082 (b), to another institution in order to serve the remainder of his Federal sentences. Petitioner was released “as if * * * on parole”, and when he absconded from Federal parole supervision in July 1967, he was properly taken back into custody as a mandatory release (i. e., parole) violator.

Moreover, it is also apparent that petitioner is not entitled to credit for the time which he spent in State custody. The record discloses that petitioner’s conditional release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4164 was revoked by the United States Board of Parole prior to the expiration of the maximum term of his Federal sentences. That this action was properly within the power of the Board is made apparent by the following teaching of Welch v. Taylor, 292 F.2d 481, 483 (10th Cir. 1961), a case with a remarkably similar factual situation :

Thus, it is clear that petitioner’s contentions are without merit.

From the preceding analysis of petitioner’s allegations, it is obvious that there are no grounds or reasons of any kind set forth to support the granting of a hearing or to support the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.

Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be, and the same is, denied.

. 28 U.S.C. § 2241

. 18 U.S.C. § 4164 .

. 18 U.S.C. § 4082