(PC) Sanchez v. Eaton et al

Filing 6

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Action Should not be Dismissed for Failure to Exhaust signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/7/2021. Show Cause Response due within 21 Days.(Sant Agata, S)

Case 1:21-cv-00736-JLT Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GABRIEL CHARLES SANCHEZ,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
PATRICK EATON, et al.,

Case No. 1:21-cv-00736-JLT (PC)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO EXHAUST
21-DAY DEADLINE

Defendants.

16
17

Gabriel Charles Sanchez alleges the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his health

18

by exposing him to COVID-19. (Doc. 1.) In his complaint, Plaintiff indicates that he has not filed

19

an administrative grievance regarding his claims. (Id. at 3, 4.)

20

The Prison Litigation Reform Act provides that “[n]o action shall be brought with respect

21

to prison conditions under . . . any other Federal law . . . by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison,

22

or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.”

23

42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Exhaustion of administrative remedies is mandatory and “unexhausted

24

claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211 (citation omitted). The

25

exhaustion requirement applies to all inmate suits relating to prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 534

26

U.S. 516, 532 (2002), regardless of the relief sought by the prisoner or offered by the

27

administrative process, Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). Inmates are required to

28

“complete the administrative review process in accordance with the applicable procedural rules,

Case 1:21-cv-00736-JLT Document 6 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 2
1

including deadlines, as a precondition to bringing suit in federal court.” Woodford v. Ngo, 548

2

U.S. 81, 88, 93 (2006). Generally, failure to exhaust is an affirmative defense that the defendant

3

must plead and prove. Jones, 549 U.S. at 204, 216. However, courts may dismiss a claim if

4

failure to exhaust is clear on the face of the complaint. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1166

5

(9th Cir. 2014).

6

It is clear on the face of his complaint that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative

7

remedies prior to filing suit. Accordingly, within 21 days of the date of service of this order,

8

Plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to

9

exhaust. Alternatively, within that same time, Plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 7, 2021

_ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2