UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                


John M. Solberg,                      File No. 23-cv-3568 (ECT/DTS)       

     Petitioner,                                                     

v.                                   ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT               
                                  AND RECOMMENDATION                 
B. Eischen, Warden;                                                       
J. Kozulla, Case Manager;                                                 
S. Hachey, Counselor;                                                     
and Bureau of Prisons,                                                    

     Respondents.                                                    
________________________________________________________________________  
John M. Solberg, pro se.                                                  

Ana H. Voss and Emily M. Peterson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for 
Respondents B. Eischen, J. Kozulla, S. Hachey, and Bureau of Prisons.     


Petitioner John M. Solberg commenced this action pro se by filing a petition for a 
writ of habeas corpus.  ECF No. 1.  After pleading guilty to one count of mail fraud, Solberg 
was sentenced to thirty months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised 
release.  See Amended Judgment at 2, United States v. Solberg, No. 19-cr-213-WCG-1 
(E.D. Wis. Feb. 2, 2023), ECF No. 84.  Solberg’s habeas petition challenges the Bureau of 
Prison’s calculation of First Step Act Time Credits (FTCs).  ECF No. 1.   
The case is now before the Court on a Report and Recommendation issued by 
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz.  ECF No. 29.  Judge Schultz recommends dismissing 
Solberg’s petition for several reasons.  First, Solberg is not entitled to FTCs for his time 
spent in custody before his arrival at FPC Duluth because he did not participate in 
qualifying programming or activities during that period.  Id. at 3–6; see also Martinez v. 
Eischen, No. 24-cv-637 (KMM/DJF), 

, at *2 (D. Minn. Apr. 12, 2024).  
Second, the BOP correctly calculated Solberg’s FTCs as he earned them (rather than “up 

front,” based on his entire imposed sentence), consistent with the language and purpose of 
the First Step Act.   ECF No. 29 at 6–8; 

(d)(4) (“A prisoner . . . who 
successfully completes evidence-based recidivism reduction programming or productive 
activities, shall earn time credits as follows . . . .” (emphasis added)).  Third, Solberg does 
not have a protected liberty interest in future FTCs.  ECF No. 29 at 6–7; see Smith v. 

Eischen, No. 22-cv-1704 (NEB/DJF), 

, at *2 (D. Minn. June 27, 2023), 
aff’d, No. 23-2620, 

 (8th Cir. Apr. 5, 2024); see also Fiorito v. Fikes, 
No. 22-cv-0749 (PJS/TNL), et al., 

, at *6 (D. Minn. Nov. 3, 2022), 
aff’d, No. 23-1006, et al., 

 (8th Cir. July 28, 2023).     
Solberg  filed  objections  to  the  Report  and  Recommendation.    ECF  No.  31.  

Respondents  filed  a  response  addressing  Solberg’s  objections  and  confirming 
Respondents’  view  that  the  Report  and  Recommendation  “should  be  adopted  in  its 
entirety.”  ECF No. 39 at 1.  Because Solberg has objected, the Court is required to review 
the Report and Recommendation de novo pursuant to 

(b)(1) and Local 
Rule 72.2(b)(3).  The Court has undertaken that de novo review and has concluded that 

Judge Schultz’s analysis and conclusions are correct.                     
Therefore, based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned 
matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT:                                               
1.   The  Objections  to  the  Report  and  Recommendation  [ECF  No.  31]  are 

OVERRULED;                                                                
2.   The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 29] is ACCEPTED in full;  
3.   Petitioner John M. Solberg’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] 
is DENIED; and                                                            
4.   The action is DISMISSED without prejudice.                      

       LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.                          



Dated:  June 21, 2024         s/ Eric C. Tostrud                          
                         Eric C. Tostrud                             
                         United States District Court                

             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                            
                DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                


John M. Solberg,                      File No. 23-cv-3568 (ECT/DTS)       

     Petitioner,                                                     

v.                                   ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT               
                                  AND RECOMMENDATION                 
B. Eischen, Warden;                                                       
J. Kozulla, Case Manager;                                                 
S. Hachey, Counselor;                                                     
and Bureau of Prisons,                                                    

     Respondents.                                                    
________________________________________________________________________  
John M. Solberg, pro se.                                                  

Ana H. Voss and Emily M. Peterson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for 
Respondents B. Eischen, J. Kozulla, S. Hachey, and Bureau of Prisons.     


Petitioner John M. Solberg commenced this action pro se by filing a petition for a 
writ of habeas corpus.  ECF No. 1.  After pleading guilty to one count of mail fraud, Solberg 
was sentenced to thirty months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised 
release.  See Amended Judgment at 2, United States v. Solberg, No. 19-cr-213-WCG-1 
(E.D. Wis. Feb. 2, 2023), ECF No. 84.  Solberg’s habeas petition challenges the Bureau of 
Prison’s calculation of First Step Act Time Credits (FTCs).  ECF No. 1.   
The case is now before the Court on a Report and Recommendation issued by 
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz.  ECF No. 29.  Judge Schultz recommends dismissing 
Solberg’s petition for several reasons.  First, Solberg is not entitled to FTCs for his time 
spent in custody before his arrival at FPC Duluth because he did not participate in 
qualifying programming or activities during that period.  Id. at 3–6; see also Martinez v. 
Eischen, No. 24-cv-637 (KMM/DJF), 

, at *2 (D. Minn. Apr. 12, 2024).  
Second, the BOP correctly calculated Solberg’s FTCs as he earned them (rather than “up 

front,” based on his entire imposed sentence), consistent with the language and purpose of 
the First Step Act.   ECF No. 29 at 6–8; 

(d)(4) (“A prisoner . . . who 
successfully completes evidence-based recidivism reduction programming or productive 
activities, shall earn time credits as follows . . . .” (emphasis added)).  Third, Solberg does 
not have a protected liberty interest in future FTCs.  ECF No. 29 at 6–7; see Smith v. 

Eischen, No. 22-cv-1704 (NEB/DJF), 

, at *2 (D. Minn. June 27, 2023), 
aff’d, No. 23-2620, 

 (8th Cir. Apr. 5, 2024); see also Fiorito v. Fikes, 
No. 22-cv-0749 (PJS/TNL), et al., 

, at *6 (D. Minn. Nov. 3, 2022), 
aff’d, No. 23-1006, et al., 

 (8th Cir. July 28, 2023).     
Solberg  filed  objections  to  the  Report  and  Recommendation.    ECF  No.  31.  

Respondents  filed  a  response  addressing  Solberg’s  objections  and  confirming 
Respondents’  view  that  the  Report  and  Recommendation  “should  be  adopted  in  its 
entirety.”  ECF No. 39 at 1.  Because Solberg has objected, the Court is required to review 
the Report and Recommendation de novo pursuant to 

(b)(1) and Local 
Rule 72.2(b)(3).  The Court has undertaken that de novo review and has concluded that 

Judge Schultz’s analysis and conclusions are correct.                     
Therefore, based upon all the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned 
matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT:                                               
1.   The  Objections  to  the  Report  and  Recommendation  [ECF  No.  31]  are 

OVERRULED;                                                                
2.   The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 29] is ACCEPTED in full;  
3.   Petitioner John M. Solberg’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] 
is DENIED; and                                                            
4.   The action is DISMISSED without prejudice.                      

       LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.                          



Dated:  June 21, 2024         s/ Eric C. Tostrud                          
                         Eric C. Tostrud                             
                         United States District Court