(PC) Sharpe v. Sherman, et al.
ORDER Concerning Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 03/31/2021.(Flores, E)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. 1:19-cv-00711-DAD-EPG (PC)
C. CRYER, et al.,
ORDER CONCERNING MOTION FOR
Adam Sharpe (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on Plaintiff’s
complaint (ECF No. 1), which he filed on May 21, 2019, against Defendant C. Cryer, J. Lewis
and S. Gates for deliberate indifference to a serious medical condition in violation of the Eighth
Amendment and against Defendant S. Smith for failure to protect in violation of the Eighth
Amendment. (ECF No. 33).
On December 24, 2020, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment as to Defendant
Smith only on the ground that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies against
Defendant Smith. (ECF No. 50). Defendants attached several non-healthcare grievances and
supporting documents from individuals who process non-healthcare grievances. (ECF Nos. 50-4
Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion on March 4, 2021. His opposition refers to, but
does not attach, a healthcare grievance:
Plaintiff did exhaust appeal Log # HC 19001205 which is also the basis of this
lawsuit and speaks to a general grievance on plaintiff’s treatment and living
conditions regarding his keratoconus at the time of the filing of this suit Plaintiff
was without proper contact lenses and thus severly visually impaired shortly after
being seriously injured in a cell assault as Plaintiff warned was a risk in BOTH
his reasonable accommodation request.
(ECF No. 57 at 8-9) (as in original).
Defendants filed a reply on March 12, 2021. Defendants claim it did not satisfy the
exhaustion requirement. (ECF No. 58 at 4). However, Defendants do not attach the grievance.
Given that Defendant Smith is requesting dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims as to Defendant
Smith based on non-exhaustion, Defendant Smith has provided information on what it claims are
the relevant administrative grievances, but Defendant Smith has not provided information on one
grievance that Plaintiff contends exhausts his administrative remedies, the Court orders as
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within fourteen days, Defendants shall file
a copy of Plaintiff’s administrative grievance related to “Log # HC 19001205,” as well as
sufficient documents or evidence to determine if that grievance was exhausted at the third level.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
March 31, 2021
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?