Kenney v. Kallis, 5:17-cv-00135

Petitioner Walando Kenney, a federal inmate, filed a pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging the Bureau of Prisons’ computation of his federal sentence end date, asserting he was denied credit for federal pretrial and post-sentencing custody and that his sentence should have ended May 18, 2018.
Petitioner admits he had not exhausted BOP administrative remedies at the time of filing but requested an exhaustion waiver to avoid additional incarceration.
Respondent (Warden Stephen Kallis) moved to dismiss or for summary judgment, arguing exhaustion was required and that the BOP correctly applied the contested custody time to the petitioner’s state sentence.
The magistrate judge recommended dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust, noting unresolved factual issues (e.g., bond release, primary custody relinquishment, reasons for federal detention during state proceedings) that the administrative process could develop.
Petitioner filed objections claiming administrative exhaustion would be futile, that delay caused irreparable harm, and that he had difficulty obtaining the BP-9 form; the district court reviewed objections de novo.
The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report, overruled petitioner’s objections, granted the respondent’s motion, dismissed the petition without prejudice, and dismissed as moot petitioner’s later motion to remand and appoint counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether exhaustion of BOP administrative remedies should be excused	Kenney: exhaustion should be waived because delay will cause irreparable harm and administrative process may not develop facts	Kallis: exhaustion not excused; petitioner failed to show futility and time constraints alone do not excuse exhaustion	Waiver denied; petitioner must exhaust administrative remedies before § 2241 relief
Whether unresolved factual issues permit bypassing administrative process	Kenney: court adjudication is more efficient; administrative process may not develop facts	Kallis: BOP process can and should develop factual record regarding custody credits	Court held unresolved factual issues weigh in favor of exhaustion because administrative record is needed
Whether petitioner’s delay in filing grievances (form unavailability) excuses exhaustion requirement	Kenney: delayed by inability to obtain BP-9 form (email evidence)	Kallis: petitioner could have begun administrative process earlier; form delay insufficient	Court found form email dated after computation and not a sufficient excuse; dismissal appropriate
Relief disposition given procedural default/non-exhaustion	Kenney: requests habeas relief now and asks court to decide merits	Kallis: move to dismiss or for summary judgment based on non-exhaustion and correct computation	Case dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust; motions to remand/appoint counsel dismissed as moot

McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140 (1992) (administrative exhaustion can produce a useful record for judicial review)
Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) (proper exhaustion often creates an administrative record helpful to courts)