Miner v. Bondi et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TERMPSREF
MDR
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Ronald L. Miner,
Petitioner,
v.
Pamela Bondi, et al.,
Respondents.
No. CV-25-03540-PHX-JAT (JFM)
ORDER
Self-represented Petitioner Ronald L. Miner, who is confined in the Federal
Correctional Institution-Phoenix (FCI-Phoenix), filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) and a Memorandum in Support (Doc. 2). After
the Court gave Petitioner an opportunity to either pay the filing fee for this action or file an
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Petitioner paid the filing fee. The Court will
require Respondent Gunther to answer to the Petition and will dismiss Respondent Bondi
as redundant.
I. Petition
In his Petition, Petitioner names United States Attorney General Pamela Bondi and
FCI-Phoenix Warden Jason Gunther as Respondents. Petitioner raises three grounds for
relief:
(1) the “System” developed by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3631 and 3621 for “[First Step Act] risk and
needs assessment does not comply with the requirements of the statute
because it uses static factors that either will never change or are not
likely to change during a term of imprisonment.”
Case 2:25-cv-03540-JAT-JFM Document 6 Filed 11/10/25 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TERMPSREF
(2) BOP “does not offer sufficient programming to meaningfully reduce
an inmate[’]s risk of recidivism by assigning each inmate to
appropriate evidence-based recidivism reduction programs which
address specific criminogenic needs” and FCI-Phoenix does not offer
any courses that reduce Petitioner’s “risk points.”
(3) “All prisoners at each risk level do not have a meaningful opportunity
to reduce their classification during their period of incarceration[,] in
accordance with 18 USC § 3632(a)(5)(A).”
The Court will require Respondent Gunther to answer the Petition and will dismiss
as redundant Respondent Bondi. See Johnson v. Reilly, 349 F.3d 1149, 1153 (9th Cir.
2003) (“Where a prisoner files an action under section 2241, ‘the prisoner must name the
warden of the penitentiary where he is confined as a respondent.’” (quoting Allen v.
Oregon, 153 F.3d 1046, 1050 (9th Cir. 1998))).
II. Warnings
A. Address Changes
Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with
Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner must not include a motion
for other relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal
of this action.
B. Copies
Petitioner must serve Respondent Gunther, or counsel if an appearance has been
entered, a copy of every document he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include
a certificate stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also,
Petitioner must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv 5.4.
Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Petitioner.
C. Possible Dismissal
If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including
these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v.
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action
for failure to comply with any order of the Court).
Case 2:25-cv-03540-JAT-JFM Document 6 Filed 11/10/25 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TERMPSREF
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) Respondent Bondi is dismissed as redundant.
(2) The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Summons, the Petition (Doc. 1),
the Memorandum in Support (Doc. 2), and this Order upon the United States Attorney for
the District of Arizona by certified mail addressed to the civil process clerk at the office of
the United States Attorney pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. The Clerk of Court must also send by certified mail a copy of the Summons,
the Petition, the Memorandum of Support, and this Order to the United States Attorney
General pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(B) and to Respondent Jason Gunther pursuant to Rule
4(i)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
(3) Respondent Jason Gunther must answer the Petition within 20 days of the
date of service. Respondent Gunther shall not file a dispositive motion in place of an
answer without first showing cause as to why an answer is inadequate.
(4) Regarding courtesy copies of documents for chambers, Respondent Jason
Gunther is directed to review Section II(D) of the Court’s Electronic Case Filing
Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, which requires that “a courtesy copy of
the filing, referencing the specific document number, shall be printed directly from
CM/ECF.” CM/ECF Admin. Man. § II(D)(3) (emphasis added). See http://www.azd.usco
urts.gov/sites/default/files/documents/adm%20manual.pdf.
(5) Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the
answer.
(6) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge James F. Metcalf pursuant to
Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a
report and recommendation.
Dated this 10th day of November, 2025.
Case 2:25-cv-03540-JAT-JFM Document 6 Filed 11/10/25 Page 3 of 3