USA v. Iwai

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BRYANT IWAI,
Defendant.
Case No. 15-cr-00723-DKW
ORDER DENYING
DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION
TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS ON APPEAL1
On December 19, 2025, the Court denied pro se Defendant Bryant Iwai’s
motion for compassionate release pursuant to the First Step Act and 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Dkt. No. 263. On December 29, 2025, Iwai appealed the denial
of his motion, Dkt. No. 264, and, on January 5, 2026, filed an application to proceed
in district court without prepaying fees or costs (“IFP Application”), Dkt. No. 269.
Although the IFP Application was filed on a district court form, in light of the
procedural posture of this case and Iwai’s pro se status, the Court liberally construes
the IFP Application as seeking leave to proceed without prepayment of fees or costs
on appeal. 	See Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(1) (providing that “a party to a district-court
1 Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c), the Court finds these matters suitable for disposition without a
hearing.
Case 1:15-cr-00723-DKW Document 270 Filed 01/22/26 Page 1 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

- 2 -
action who desires to appeal in forma pauperis must file a motion in the district
court.”).
Appeals “may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in
writing that it is not taken in good faith.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). “A certificate that
an appeal is not taken in good faith may be entered if there is some evident improper
motive or if no issue is presented which is not plainly frivolous.” Tweedy v. United
States, 276 F.2d 649, 651 (9th Cir. 1960) (citing Ellis v. United States, 356 U.S. 674,
675 (1958)).
The Court denies Iwai’s IFP Application because his appeal is plainly
frivolous. 	Iwai seeks compassionate release under Section 3582, but any such
application first requires a defendant to exhaust his administrative remedies. 	See
United States v. Keller, 2 F.4th 1278, 1281 (9th Cir. 2021) (per curiam) (noting that
Section 3582(c)(1)(A)’s exhaustion requirement is a “mandatory claim-processing
rule that must be enforced when properly invoked.”). 	The Court has already
explained to Iwai at least twice that exhaustion is mandatory. Dkt. Nos. 216, 263.
Despite this, Iwai did not fully exhaust his remedies by petitioning his prison’s
warden for release on the grounds presented in his present Section 3582 motion, see
Dkt. No. 255 at 17–26, or appealing a denial of such a petition within the Bureau of
Prisons, see United States v. Hirano, 2022 WL 1540230, at *3 (D. Haw. May 16,
2022) (holding that “the language of the statute plainly indicates that, under the
Case 1:15-cr-00723-DKW Document 270 Filed 01/22/26 Page 2 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

- 3 -
circumstances here, the ‘administrative right[] to appeal’ must be exhausted”
(quoting Section 3582(c)(1)(A))).
The absence of exhaustion was made clear to Iwai in the Court’s December
19, 2025 Order denying compassionate release. Dkt. No. 262. Iwai now moves for
IFP status on appeal of this Order but has not offered any arguments as to why the
Court’s exhaustion ruling was incorrect, nor identified any other grounds for his
appeal. 	Accordingly, the Court finds that Iwai’s appeal is “plainly frivolous.”
Tweedy, 276 F.2d at 651.
For the reasons set forth herein, the Court certifies that Iwai’s appeal is not
taken in good faith, and his IFP Application, Dkt. No. 269, is DENIED. The Clerk
is directed to send a copy of this Order to Iwai and to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals. See Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(4).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 22, 2026 at Honolulu, Hawai‘i.
United States of America vs. Bryant Iwai; CR 15-00723 DKW; ORDER
DENYING DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
___________________________
Derrick K. Watson
Chief United States District Judge
Case 1:15-cr-00723-DKW Document 270 Filed 01/22/26 Page 3 of 3
PageID.<pageID>