Danny Ryan Sass v. JEFF E. THOMAS, Warden Federal Prison Camp Sheridan, Oregon

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANNY RYAN SASS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JEFF E. THOMAS, Warden Federal
Prison Camp Sheridan, Oregon,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-35830
DC No. 08 cv-0300 MA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Malcolm F. Marsh, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted October 4, 2010
Portland, Oregon
Before: TASHIMA, PAEZ, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Danny Ryan Sass appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1291 and 2253(a), and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 08 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
1. Sass contends that the Bureau of Prisons’ (“BOP”) policies
interpreting the Second Chance Act (“SCA”) are substantively and procedurally
invalid. The SCA, however, had not yet become effective, and the BOP’s
memoranda and regulations that are at issue on appeal had not yet been
implemented when the BOP denied Sass’ only request for a transfer to a
Residential Re-Entry Center (“RRC”) that is documented in the record.
Accordingly, Sass’ claims challenging the BOP’s SCA-based policies are not ripe
for review. See Bova v. City of Medford, 564 F.3d 1093, 1096 (9th Cir. 2009).
2. Sass also argues that the BOP, in denying his particular request for
transfer to an RRC, violated 18 U.S.C. § 3621 by failing to consider the factors
enumerated in that statute. We conclude that the record does not support this
contention. We further note that, in any event, the BOP will evaluate any future
RRC applications by Sass under its SCA-based policies, which we recently
approved in the related case of Sacora v. Thomas, No. 10-35553, slip op. 19415
(9th Cir. Dec. 6, 2010).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --