Rawls v. Walls et al

Filing 48

ORDER requiring Defendants to concede exhaustion or file a dispositive motion on the issue by October 30, 2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda R. Anderson on October 15, 2020 (Rushing, Terryl)

Case 3:19-cv-00839-CWR-LRA Document 48 Filed 10/15/20 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
NORTHERN DIVISION

STANLEY ELLIS RAWLS
VS.

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-CV-839-CWR-LRA

LAVONNE WALLS; CYNTHIA GRIFFIN;
ALVA GREEN, Commissary Manager;
WARDEN J. LAMAR SHAW; CHAZ
WHITE; RICKY SESSION; WARDEN
ANDERSON JOHNSON; and MELANIE
TOWNSEND, Compliance Manager

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The Defendants have now filed their Answers in this cause, and the affirmative
defense of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been raised.

Under the law

regarding cases filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the issue of whether the prisoner
plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies must be determined before the case
can proceed.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA): “No action shall be brought with
respect to prison ... by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility
until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” (42 U.S.C. § 1997e).
The Supreme Court has made it clear that exhaustion is an absolute prerequisite and that
the administrative remedies should be invoked in a timely manner and pursued to their
conclusion.

Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 84 (2006).

The exhaustion must be

Case 3:19-cv-00839-CWR-LRA Document 48 Filed 10/15/20 Page 2 of 2

completed before a federal lawsuit is filed; it is irrelevant if the exhaustion process is
completed during the federal proceedings.

See, Gonzalez v. Seal, 702 F.3d 785, 787-88

(5th Cir. 2012) (per curiam).
Before an omnibus hearing is conducted, or discovery is ordered, the Defendants
must either concede the issue of exhaustion or file a dispositive motion on those grounds.
Plaintiff will then be given an opportunity to respond to the motion in writing, setting
forth the reasons he believes he has completed the exhaustion process.
entered on the motion before further proceedings are scheduled.

A ruling will be

It may or may not be

necessary for the Court to conduct a hearing on the motion.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that any Defendant who has not already filed a
dispositive motion on the issue of exhaustion shall either concede the issue or file a
dispositive motion on this basis on or before October 30, 2020.

Plaintiff shall file his

written response to the motion on or before 14 days after the motion is filed; Defendants’
reply shall be due 7 days after the response.

Plaintiff is warned that his failure to file a

written response to the motion may result in a finding that he has conceded the factual
allegations set forth in Defendants’ motion.
SO ORDERED, this the 15th day of October, 2020.

/s/ Linda R. Anderson
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2