Case Name: Dan PIZARRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis SMITH, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-01
Citations: 328 F. App'x 450
Docket Number: No. 07-16465
Parties: Dan PIZARRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis SMITH, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 450–450

Head Matter:
Dan PIZARRO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dennis SMITH, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 07-16465.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed July 1, 2009.
Dan Pizarro, Atwater, CA, pro se.
Phillip A. Talbert, Esquire, USSAC-Of-fice of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Bureau of Prisons, Esquire, Dublin, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Federal prisoner Dan Pizarro appeals pro se from the district court's judgment entered on July 12, 2007, 2007 WL 2043848, in his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We accord substantial deference to the district court's factual finding that Respondent complied with the district court's order. Aloe Vera of Am., Inc. v. United States, 376 F.3d 960, 966 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.
The district court'correctly determined that Respondent complied with its order to evaluate Pizarro for placement in a residential reentry center without regard to 28 C.F.R. § 570.20-21. Respondent did not violate 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) by considering Program Statement 7310.04.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.