Odom v. Barker et al
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER, 1) Odom's complaint 1 is DISMISSED without prejudice 2) any and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT 3) action is STRICKEN from Court's docket 4) a corresponding judgment will be entered this date. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 2/6/18.(SMT)cc: COR, Odom via USMail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
NORTHERN DIVISION at ASHLAND
GLENN D. ODOM, II,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHRIS BARKER, ET AL.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil No. 0:18-007-HRW
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER
*** *** *** ***
Glenn D. Odom, II, is a prisoner who was recently confined at the Little Sandy
Correctional Complex in Sandy Hook, Kentucky. Proceeding without an attorney,
Odom filed a civil rights complaint with this Court in which he alleges, among other
things, that in August 201 7 he was the victim of excessive force at the hands of the
defendants. [D. E. No. 1].
This Court, however, will dismiss Odom's complaint without prejudice
because it is apparent from his submission that he has not yet fully exhausted his
administrative remedies. See Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 214-15 (2007) (indicating
that a district court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint when it is apparent that the
claim is barred by an affirmative defense); Fletcher v. Myers, No. 5: l l-cv-141-KKC
(E.D. Ky. 2012), ajf'd, No. 12-5630 (6th Cir. 2013) ("Because Fletcher's failure to
exhaust, or to attempt to exhaust, administrative remedies is apparent from the face
1
of his complaint, the district court properly dismissed Fletcher's complaint on that
basis."). Indeed, Odom attached to his complaint an initial, informal grievance form
that he filed with prison officials and, on that form, he clearly indicated that he was
satisfied with the resolution of his grievance. [D. E. No. 1 at 5]. This is the only
grievance form that Odom submitted to the Court, and he does not allege that he
pursued additional administrative remedies with prison officials. In fact, although
Odom filed his complaint on this Court's standard E.D. Ky. 520 complaint form, he
omitted those pages of the form regarding exhaustion of administrative remedies.
[D. E. No. 1 at 3-4 (skipping from page 3 of 8 to page 8 of 8)].
In light of the foregoing facts, it is clear that Odom did not fully exhaust his
administrative remedies.
Since exhaustion is mandatory under the Prisoner
Litigation Reform Act, see Jones, 549 U.S. at 216, and Odom cites no justification
for his failure to fully exhaust those remedies, the Court will dismiss his complaint
without prejudice. Ultimately, Odom may still pursue this matter, but he must first
fully exhaust his administrative remedies.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. Odom's complaint [D. E. No. l] is DISMISSED, without prejudice.
2. Any and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
3. This action is STRICKEN from the Court's docket.
4. A corresponding judgment will be entered this date.
2
This 6th day of February, 2018.
3
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?