Lang v. Rule

Opinion

Case: 25-10380 Document: 36-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/10/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals ____________ Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 25-10380 October 10, 2025 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

Barbara Lang,

Petitioner—Appellant,

versus

Tyal Rule, Warden, Carswell FMC,

Respondent—Appellee. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:24-CV-788 ______________________________

Before Smith, Higginson, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Barbara Lang, federal prisoner #45300-074, appeals the denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus petition. Lang is serving a 280-year prison term, and she maintains that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) failed to apply time credits toward her sentence and that she should be placed in home confinement on pre-release custody.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-10380 Document: 36-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/10/2025

No. 25-10380

When considering the denial of § 2241 relief, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. Jeffers v. Chandler, 253 F.3d 827, 830 (5th Cir. 2001). We “may affirm the denial of habeas relief on any ground supported by the record.” Scott v. Johnson, 227 F.3d 260, 262 (5th Cir. 2000). Lang fails to demonstrate that the BOP incorrectly calculated her good-conduct time or time credits under the First Step Act and Second Chance Act, or that the BOP incorrectly applied any of those credits when computing her release date. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3632(d), 3624(b), (c), (g). Likewise, Lang has failed to demonstrate that she is entitled to § 2241 relief with respect to the BOP’s interpretation of 34 U.S.C. § 60541, and to the extent that she challenges the ruling that a § 2241 petition is not an appropri- ate vehicle for a request for release to home confinement, her arguments are unavailing. See Melot v. Bergami, 970 F.3d 596, 599-600 (5th Cir. 2020). AFFIRMED.