(a) Immediate use of force. Staff may immediately use force and/or apply restraints when the behavior described in § 552.20 constitutes an immediate, serious threat to the inmate, staff, others, property, or to institution security and good order.
(b) Calculated use of force and/or application of restraints. This occurs in situations where an inmate is in an area that can be isolated (e.g., a locked cell, a range) and where there is no immediate, direct threat to the inmate or others. When there is time for the calculated use of force or application of restraints, staff must first determine if the situation can be resolved without resorting to force (see § 552.23).
(c) Use of Force Team Technique. If use of force is determined to be necessary, and other means of gaining control of an inmate are deemed inappropriate or ineffective, then the Use of Force Team Technique shall be used to control the inmate and to apply soft restraints, to include ambulatory leg restraints. The Use of Force Team Technique ordinarily involves trained staff, clothed in protective gear, who enter the inmate's area in tandem, each with a coordinated responsibility for helping achieve immediate control of the inmate.
(d) Exceptions. Any exception to this rule is prohibited, except where the facts and circumstances known to the staff member would warrant a person using sound correctional judgment to reasonably believe other action is necessary (as a last resort) to prevent serious physical injury, or serious property damage which would immediately endanger the safety of staff, inmates, or others.
[59 FR 30469, June 13, 1994, as amended at 61 FR 39800, July 30, 1996]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case:
Bruscino v. Carlson, 654 F. Supp. 609 (S.D. Ill. 1987).
Bruscino v. Carlson, 654 F. Supp. 609 (S.D. Ill. 1987).
“28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a)(1986) (emphasis added).”
Dhiab v. Obama, 70 F. Supp. 3d 486 (D.D.C. 2014).
“06, Subject: Use of Force and Application of Restraints; 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 et seq. 10 . See, e.g.”
David J. Widi v. United States et al., 2020 DNH 206 (D.N.H. 2020).
· cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a). “In an immediate use of force situation, staff may respond with or without the presence or direction of a supervisor.”
(PC) Barbour v. United States (E.D. Cal. 2020).
· cites it 3× “19 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a).3 Calculated use of force is employed in situations where there is no 20 immediate, direct threat to the inmate or others.”
McIntosh v. United States (N.D. Ill. 2022).
· cites it 2× “062 and 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a) generally authorize an immediate use of force and restraints to gain control of an inmate when the inmate’s conduct constitutes an immediate, serious threat to the inmate, staff, others, property, or to institution security and order.”
Widi, Jr. v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons (D.N.H. 2020).
· cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a). “In an immediate use of force situation, staff may respond with or without the presence or direction of a supervisor.”
Reid (W.D. Va. 2026).
· cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 552.21 (a). BOP Policy explains that “[i]n an immediate use of force situation, employees may respond with or without the presence or direction of a supervisor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.