Sango #252200 v. Bastian et al

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 27 re 10 , 18 , 7 , 26 ; case closed; signed by Judge Gordon J. Quist (Judge Gordon J. Quist, jmt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION

ROBERT SANGO,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 2:15-CV-105

v.

HON. GORDON J. QUIST

TODD BASTIAN, et al.,
Defendants.
/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On March 3, 2016, Magistrate Judge Timothy P. Greeley issued a Report and
Recommendation (R & R) in which he recommended that the Court grant Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment because Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Plaintiff filed
an objection, arguing that he exhausted all available remedies because Defendants removed his
grievance from the mailbox. After conducting a de novo review of the R & R, Plaintiff’s Objection,
Defendants’ Response, and the pertinent portions of the record, the Court concludes that the R &
R should be adopted.
Plaintiff acknowledges that he did not file a grievance concerning the issues in this case, but
argues that he exhausted his available administrative remedies because Defendants took his
completed grievance out of the mailbox. Plaintiff allegedly completed a grievance on August 3,
2015, and then filed the complaint in this case one week later. During that one week period,
Plaintiff filed two grievances unrelated to this action. Thus, even assuming that Plaintiff’s
allegations regarding the removal of his grievance are true, the grievance process was nonetheless
available to Plaintiff during the days leading up to the filing of his complaint. Accordingly, the

Court concludes that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies, and need not
decide whether Plaintiff could have appealed the grievance to Step II or whether Defendants violated
the grievance process. The Court further rejects Plaintiff’s argument that he was not afforded an
opportunity for discovery, as discovery is not necessary to determine exhaustion in this case.
Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Report and Recommendation issued on March 3, 2016
(ECF No. 27) is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF
No. 18) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 10)
is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
(ECF No.7) is DENIED

Dated: April 14, 2016

/s/ Gordon J. Quist
GORDON J. QUIST
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2