Hays v. Wasco State Prison Doctors et al

Filing 10

ORDER REQUIRING Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed, Without Prejudice, for Failure to Exhaust Prior to Filing Suit 1 , signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 3/25/15: 21-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JONATHAN HAYS, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 v. WASCO PRISON MEDICAL DOCTORS, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00453-JLT (PC) ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, FOR FAILUE TO EXHAUST PRIOR TO FILING SUIT (Doc. 1) 15 Defendants. 16 17 21-DAY DEADLINE Plaintiff, Jonathan Hays, claims he suffered a violation of his Eighth Amendments rights 18 related to the medical treatment he received and failed to receive related to an injury to his leg. 19 Notably, however, the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides,“[n]o action shall be 20 brought with respect to prison conditions under [42 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, by a 21 prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative 22 remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Prisoners are required to exhaust 23 the available administrative remedies before filing suit. Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211 (2007); 24 McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). Exhaustion is required regardless 25 of the relief sought by the prisoner and regardless of the relief offered by the process, Booth v. 26 Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001), and the exhaustion requirement applies to all suits relating to 27 prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 435 U.S. 516, 532 (2002). 28 In his complaint, Plaintiff concedes that while there is a grievance procedure at the 1 institution, he did not present the facts in his complaint for review through the grievance 2 procedure, explaining that he had a broken leg that needed to be fixed "ASAP." (Doc. 1, Comp., 3 pp. 1-2.) Thus, it appears Plaintiff filed suit prematurely without first exhausting the 4 administrative remedies in compliance with section 1997e(a). 5 Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to show cause in writing within 21 days 6 from the date of service of this order, why this action should not be dismissed, without prejudice, 7 for failure to exhaust prior to filing suit. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 (9th Cir. 2003) 8 (“A prisoner’s concession to nonexhaustion is a valid ground for dismissal. . . .”). 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 25, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?