878 F.2d 385
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Clovis Carl GREEN, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Peter Carlson, Warden
Respondents-Appellees.
No. 88-15022.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 10, 1989.
Decided June 23, 1989.
Charles L. Hardy, District Judge, Presiding.
Before HUG, SCHROEDER and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Petitioner brought this action in district court seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241. The district court dismissed the petition. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. The petition on its face indicates that petitioner has failed to exhaust administrative remedies. E.g., Martinez v. Roberts, 804 F.2d 570 (9th Cir.1986). Contrary to petitioner's argument, a mere allegation of futility does not require the district court to entertain his petition. The discretion of the district court to make exceptions to the requirement of exhaustion is limited, and we will not reverse the district court's determination unless there has been a clear abuse of discretion. United Farmworkers v. Arizona Agricultural Employment Relations Board, 669 F.2d 1249, 1253 (9th Cir.1982). Where the record clearly indicates there has been no exhaustion, the district court need not proceed to hearing. Martinez, 804 F.2d at 571.
AFFIRMED.