Flemons v. Bolden et al

Filing 36

ORDER adopting 33 Partial Recommendation. 30 Motion is granted and Defendant Knott is dismissed without prejudice. 24 Motion for partial summary judgment is granted and Flemons's retaliation claims are dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 9/18/2018. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
AARON ANTHONY FLEMONS
ADC# 119749

PLAINTIFF

No. 5:18-cv-73-DPM-JJV

v.

GLENDA BOLDEN, Security Officer,
EARU, ADC; DARYL MORRIS, Security
Officer, EARU, ADC; WENDY KELLEY,
Director, ADC; DAVID KNOTT, Chief of
Security, EARU, ADC; and SYNITREOUS
ROSE, Security Officer, EARU, ADC

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
On de novo review, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Volpe's
partial recommendation, NQ 33, and overrules Flemons' s objections,
NQ 34.

FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).

Flemons doesn't object to the

recommendation on his motion to voluntarily dismiss. That motion,
NQ 30, is granted.

Flemons' s claims against Defendant Knott are

dismissed without prejudice.
On exhaustion, Flemons says he didn't have an

II

available"

remedy within the meaning of the PLRA because he didn't know about
Defendants' retaliatory motives until after the fifteen-day grievance
window had closed. NQ 31 & NQ 34. But Flemons hasn't shown that
Defendants,

11

through

machination,

misrepresentation,

or

intimidation[,]" prevented him from learning of or deducing a

retaliatory motive sooner. Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1860 (2016).
And as Magistrate Judge Volpe notes, there is no

0

special

circumstances" exception to the PLRA's exhaustion requirement. Ross,
136 S. Ct. at 1858. Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment,
NQ 24, is therefore granted. Flemons' s retaliation claims are dismissed

without prejudice.
So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge
I8

-2-

¥wtlzu

~0/8