Williams v. Pfieffer, et al.

Filing 4

ORDER for Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE why Claims he is Currently Exhausting Should not be Dismissed without Prejudice for Failure to Exhaust signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 04/25/2017. Show Cause Response due by 5/30/2017.(Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 10 11 Case No. 1:17-cv-00549-EPG (PC) DONALD LEE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CLAIMS HE IS CURRENTLY EXHAUSTING SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST (ECF NO. 1) v. C. PFIEFFER, Defendants. THIRTY DAY DEADLINE 12 13 14 Donald Williams (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se with this civil rights action pursuant 15 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on April 18, 2017. 16 (ECF No. 1). The complaint is awaiting screening. 17 The Court has reviewed the complaint, and it appears that Plaintiff has exhausted at 18 least some of his claims. However, on one of his exhibits, Plaintiff wrote “I am currently 19 exhausting all my administrative remedies (appeals) regarding several CDCR-602’s [sic] staff 20 complaints related to the beaten [sic] and sexual misconduct described [in] the 1983 civil 21 complaint.” (ECF No. 1, p. 43). 22 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) states that “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison 23 conditions under section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in 24 any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available 25 are exhausted.” Exhaustion is required regardless of the relief sought by the prisoner and 26 regardless of the relief offered by the administrative process, unless “the relevant 27 administrative procedure lacks authority to provide any relief or to take any action whatsoever 28 in response to a complaint.” Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 736, 741 (2001); Ross v. Blake, 1 1 136 S.Ct. 1850, 1857, 1859 (June 6, 2016). Exhaustion of administrative remedies must occur 2 before the filing of the complaint. McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir. 2002). 3 The Court notes that a dismissal for failure to exhaust is without prejudice. Id. 4 Based on the exhibits Plaintiff included with his complaint, it appears that Plaintiff may 5 not have exhausted his administrative remedies, at least in regards to some of his claims. 6 Therefore, the Court will order Plaintiff to show cause why all claims that he is “currently 7 exhausting” should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative 8 remedies. In particular, Plaintiff should explain his statement that he is “currently exhausting” 9 his administrative remedies. 10 Accordingly, based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) 11 days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall show cause why all claims that he is 12 “currently exhausting” should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust 13 administrative remedies. Failure to respond may result in dismissal of this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: April 25, 2017 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?