Jeremy Vaughn Pinson v. Estrada, named as Nurse Estrada;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JEREMY VAUGHN PINSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ESTRADA, named as Nurse Estrada; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 21-15531
D.C. No. 4:18-cv-00535-RM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Rosemary Márquez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2022**
Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Jeremy Vaughn Pinson appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing her action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the
Federal Tort Claims Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUL 20 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 21-15531
review de novo questions of mootness. Di Giorgio v. Lee (In re Di Giorgio), 134
F.3d 971, 974 (9th Cir. 1998). We vacate and remand.
The district court dismissed Pinson’s claim against defendant Bureau of
Prisons (“BOP”) on the ground that this claim was rendered moot when Pinson
was transferred from USP Tucson to a different federal prison. However, Pinson
alleged that BOP had wrongfully removed certain medications from the BOP
formulary. To the extent BOP’s challenged action is a system-wide policy,
Pinson’s transfer to a new federal prison did not render Pinson’s claim against
BOP moot. See Johnson v. Baker, 23 F.4th 1209, 1214 n.2 (9th Cir. 2022) (“While
the transfer of an inmate to a new prison will usually moot a challenge to
conditions at a ‘particular facility,’ that is not true when the inmate attacks a
‘system wide’ policy.” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)). We
therefore vacate the district court’s judgment dismissing this action as moot, and
remand for the district court to consider in the first instance whether Pinson has
raised a challenge to a system-wide policy of BOP. On remand, the district court
should also consider Pinson’s return to USP Tucson in addressing BOP’s motion to
dismiss this action as moot.
In light of our disposition, we do not consider Pinson’s remaining
contentions on appeal.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 21-15531
The parties will bear their own costs on appeal.
VACATED and REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --