GRIFFITH v. A. DOWNEY et al

Filing 20

ENTRY - Accordingly, Defendants shall have through June 1, 2017, in which to either 1) file a dispositive motion in support of the affirmative defense that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this lawsuit, 2) notify the Court that this affirmative defense is not amenable to resolution through a dispositive motion, or 3) notify the Court that defendants will not pursue the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust. If a dispositive motion is filed, plaintiff shall have twenty-eight (28) days in which to respond. Defendants shall then have fourteen (14) days in which to reply. Except for activities associated with the development and resolution of the Defendants' affirmative defense that the Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this action, or any other matter directed by the Court, any other activities or deadlines in the action are stayed. Discovery on the issue of exhaustion is allowed. (See Entry.) Copy to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/26/2017.(JLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
JAMES F. GRIFFITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
F. BRANNICK C/O, D. HASKINS,
YARBAR Lt., DEVINE SGT., E. DRADA
Sgt., N. LYDAY Sgt., PHILLIPS Sgt.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:17-cv-00194-TWP-MJD

Entry Directing Development of Exhaustion Defense and Issuing Partial Stay
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff James F. Griffith’s Complaint alleging
violations his Eighth Amendment rights. In their April 24, 2017, Answer and Statement of
Defenses and Affirmative Defenses, Defendants have asserted the affirmative defense that
plaintiff, an Indiana prisoner, failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this
lawsuit. Dkt. 19, p. 5, ¶ 2. This defense must be resolved before reaching the merits of this case.
Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739, 742 (7th Cir. 2008); Perez v. Wis. Dep’t of Corr., 182 F.3d 532,
536 (7th Cir. 1999) (“The statute [requiring administrative exhaustion] can function properly only
if the judge resolves disputes about its application before turning to any other issue in the suit.”).
Accordingly, Defendants shall have through June 1, 2017, in which to either 1) file a
dispositive motion in support of the affirmative defense that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his
administrative remedies prior to filing this lawsuit, 2) notify the Court that this affirmative defense
is not amenable to resolution through a dispositive motion, or 3) notify the Court that defendants
will not pursue the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust. If a dispositive motion is filed, plaintiff
shall have twenty-eight (28) days in which to respond. Defendants shall then have fourteen (14)

days in which to reply.
Except for activities associated with the development and resolution of the Defendants’
affirmative defense that the Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing
this action, or any other matter directed by the Court, any other activities or deadlines in the action
are stayed. Discovery on the issue of exhaustion is allowed.
The clerk is directed to update the docket by adding plaintiff’s prison identification
number, 117892, to his address.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 4/26/2017

Distribution:
Electronically Registered Counsel
James F. Griffith, #117892
New Castle - CF
New Castle Correctional Facility - Inmate Mail/Parcels
1000 Van Nuys Road
New Castle, IN 47362

Note to Clerk: Processing this document requires actions in addition to docketing and distribution.