Bray

Filing 5

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/26/12. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Service)(cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 *E-Filed 6/26/12* 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 DEBRA BRAY, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 No. C 12-2520 RS (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL v. JOHN DOE, Defendant. / 17 18 This is a federal civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a pro se state 19 prisoner. By order of the Court, plaintiff was granted 30 days (1) to file a complete 20 application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), or (2) to pay the filing fee of $350.00, or 21 face dismissal of the action. Plaintiff was also ordered to file a complaint. More than 30 22 days have passed since the order was filed, and plaintiff has not filed a complete IFP 23 application or a complaint, nor paid the filing fee. Accordingly, the action is DISMISSED 24 without prejudice. Any motion to reopen the action must contain (1) a complete IFP 25 application or payment for the entire filing fee of $350.00, and (2) a complaint. Plaintiff’s 26 motion for an extension of time (Docket No. 4) is DENIED. 27 28 No. C 12-2520 RS (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL 1 A statement in plaintiff’s motion suggests that she has not exhausted her 2 administrative remedies. Plaintiff is reminded that she must exhaust all such remedies before 3 filing suit. 4 in federal court. “No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under [42 5 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other 6 correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 7 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Exhaustion is mandatory and is no longer left to the discretion of the 8 district court. Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 84 (2006) (citing Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 9 731, 739 (2001)). To exhaust properly administrative remedies in California state prisons, Prisoners must properly exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 inmates must proceed through a four-step process, which consists of (1) an informal attempt 11 at resolution; (2) a first-level formal appeal; (3) a second-level appeal to the institution head; 12 and (4) an appeal to the Director of the California Department of Corrections and 13 Rehabilitation. See 15 Cal. Code Regs. § 3084.5. If plaintiff moves to reopen, she must 14 show that she has exhausted all these procedures. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of 15 defendant, terminate Docket No. 4, and close the file. 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: June 26, 2012 RICHARD SEEBORG United States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 No. C 12-2520 RS (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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?