MEMORANDUM

WILLIAM W. CALDWELL, District Judge.

The pro se petitioner, Antonio Brown, has filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 alleging that he was removed from a residential re-entry center (RRC) in retaliation for having complained about certain treatment. He also complains he was removed without due process. He seeks re-admission into an RRC.

Respondent argues that the petition should be dismissed because Petitioner has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and because the petition lacks merit in any event. We agree that Petitioner has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and will dismiss the petition without reaching the merits.

The BOP has established a multi-tiered process for a federal prisoner to seek formal review of any aspect of his imprisonment. 28 C.F.R. §§ 542.10-542.19. First, "an inmate shall ... present an issue of concern informally to staff, and staff shall attempt to informally resolve the issue before an inmate submits a Request for Administrative Remedy." Id. § 542.13(a). Second, if an informal resolution does not work, the inmate may file with the warden "a formal written Administrative Remedy Request." Id. § 542.14(a). Third, from the warden's response, the inmate may appeal to the regional director. Id. § 542.15. Fourth, from the regional director the inmate may appeal to the general counsel (the Central Office). Id.

"Federal prisoners are ordinarily required to exhaust their administrative remedies before petitioning for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to § 2241." Moscato v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 98 F.3d 757, 760 (3d Cir. 1996). See also Vasquez v. Strada, 684 F.3d 431, 433 (3d Cir. 2012). As Respondent points out, Petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by not filing an appeal to the Central Office. (Doc. 7-1. ECF p. 9). We will therefore dismiss the petition. August 20, 2013

ORDER

AND NOW, this 20th day of August, 2013, it is ordered that: