MEMORANDUM **
Federal prisoner William John Green appeals pro se from the district courts judgment dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, the order denying his motion for reconsideration, and the order denying his motion for release pending appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 23(b). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm in part and dismiss in part.
The district court dismissed Greens § 2241 habeas petition and denied reconsideration on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction over Greens claims challenging his conviction and sentence, and his claims challenging the conditions of his confinement were not cognizable in habeas. On appeal, Green contends that the district court erred by concluding that it lacked habeas jurisdiction over his claim that the Bureau of Prisons violated his Eighth Amendment rights by its alleged mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic and inability to care for his underlying health conditions. We need not resolve this issue because Greens Eighth Amendment claim is now moot. Greens claim was premised on conditions at the Metropolitan Detention Center, Los Angeles (“MDC LA”), where he was housed when he filed his petition. After Green filed his motion for reconsideration, however, he was transferred to FCI Terminal Island, a facility that could better meet his medical needs. As a result, Greens claim for habeas relief premised on conditions at MDC LA is now moot, see Dilley v. Gunn, 64 F.3d 1365, 1368-69 (9th Cir. 1995), and we must dismiss the appeal insofar as it challenges the district courts resolution of that claim. By this disposition, we express no opinion as to whether Green may file a § 2241 habeas petition seeking his immediate release based on conditions at FCI Terminal Island.
We further conclude that the district court properly determined that it lacked jurisdiction over Greens challenges to his sentence and allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel because those claims did not meet the escape hatch of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). See Stephens v. Herrera, 464 F.3d 895, 897-98 (9th Cir. 2006).
In light of our disposition of this appeal, Greens challenge to the district courts order denying his Rule 23(b) motion is moot. Greens renewed request to this court for release pending appeal is denied as moot.
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.