Turner, II v. Hartley et al
Filing
8
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE, signed by Magistrate Judge Gerald B. Cohn on 06/07/2011. (Show Cause - Thirty (30) day deadline) (Martin-Gill, S)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
RICHARD J. TURNER, II,
Case: No. 1:10-cv-01490-GBC (PC)
10
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING
EXHAUSTION
Plaintiff,
11
v.
(Doc. 1)
12
JAMES D. HARTLEY, et al.,
13
14
Defendants.
/
15
16
I.
17
Richard J. Turner (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
18
this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 18, 2010, Plaintiff filed his
19
original complaint. (Doc. 1). On the form complaint, Plaintiff concedes that he has not completed
20
exhaustion of administrative remedies explaining that he seeks emergency remedy to allow Muslim
21
prisoners, including himself, to access to the chapel during the holy month of Ramadan. (Doc. 1 at
22
2).
Factual and Procedural Background
23
II.
24
Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, “[n]o action shall be brought with
25
respect to prison conditions under [42 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, by a prisoner
26
confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are
27
available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Prisoners are required to exhaust the available
28
administrative remedies prior to filing suit. Jones v. Bock, 127 S.Ct. 910, 918-19 (2007); McKinney
Exhaustion Requirement
1
1
v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). The Court must dismiss a case without
2
prejudice even when there is exhaustion while the suit is pending. Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164,
3
1170 (9th Cir. 2005).
4
Exhaustion is required regardless of the relief sought by the prisoner. Booth v. Churner, 532
5
U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819 (2001). A prisoner must “must use all steps the prison holds out,
6
enabling the prison to reach the merits of the issue.” Griffin v. Arpaio, 557 F.3d 1117, 1119 (9th Cir.
7
2009); see also Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d 926, 935 (9th Cir. 2005). A prisoner’s concession to
8
non-exhaustion is valid grounds for dismissal so long as no exception to exhaustion applies. 42
9
U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 (9th Cir. 2003).
10
The Court takes judicial notice of the fact that the California Department of Corrections and
11
Rehabilitation has an administrative grievance system for prisoner complaints. Cal. Code Regs., tit.
12
15 § 3084.1 (2008). The process is initiated by submitting a CDC Form 602. Id. at § 3084.2(a).
13
Four levels of appeal are involved, including the informal level, first formal level, second formal
14
level, and third formal level, also known as the “Director’s Level.” Id. at § 3084.5. Appeals must
15
be submitted within fifteen working days of the event being appealed, and the process is initiated by
16
submission of the appeal to the informal level, or in some circumstances, the first formal level. Id.
17
at §§ 3084.5, 3084.6(c).
18
In order to satisfy section 1997e(a), California state prisoners are required to use the available
19
process to exhaust their claims prior to filing suit. Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 126 S.Ct. 2378,
20
2383 (2006); McKinney, 311 F.3d at 1199-1201. “[E]xhaustion is mandatory under the PLRA and
21
. . . unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones, 127 S.Ct. at 918-19 (citing Porter, 435
22
U.S. at 524). “All ‘available’ remedies must now be exhausted; those remedies need not meet
23
federal standards, nor must they be ‘plain, speedy, and effective.’” Porter, 534 U.S. at 524 (quoting
24
Booth, 532 U.S. at 739 n.5). In this instance, Plaintiff conceded that he has not exhausted
25
administrative remedies.
26
///
27
///
28
///
2
1
III.
2
Because it appears that Plaintiff has not completed the grievance process, the Court
3
Conclusion and Order
HEREBY ORDERS:
4
1.
Plaintiff SHALL SHOW CAUSE why the action should not be dismissed for
5
failure to exhaust administrative remedies withing thirty (30) days of the date of
6
service of this order.
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10
Dated:
0jh02o
June 7, 2011
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
