James Bowens v. Eric Rokosky

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6443
JAMES BOWENS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC ROKOSKY,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Adam B. Abelson, District Judge. (1:25-cv-00115-ABA)
Submitted: February 26, 2026 Decided: March 3, 2026
Before NIEMEYER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Bowens, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
James Bowens, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order dismissing
without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he challenged the execution of
his sentence. The district court dismissed Bowens’s § 2241 petition on the ground that
Bowens failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and
discern no reversable error. Bowens has not demonstrated either that he completed a
Residential Drug Abuse Program and sought a sentence reduction on that ground or that
the Bureau of Prisons denied a sentence reduction upon his completion of the program.
Thus, he has not shown that his petition is ripe. See Doe v. Virginia Dep’t of State Police,
713 F.3d 745, 758 (4th Cir. 2013) (“A claim should be dismissed as unripe if the plaintiff
has not yet suffered injury and any future impact remains wholly speculative.” (citation
modified)). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order dismissing Bowens’s petition
without prejudice on the ground that his claim is not yet ripe. See Moore v. Frazier, 941
F.3d 717, 725 (4th Cir. 2019) (recognizing that this court can affirm district court’s
dismissal order “on any ground apparent on the record”). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 2 of 2 --