Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01285/USCOURTS-caed-1_24-cv-01285-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH TOWNSEND,

Plaintiff,

v.

T. COOK, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:24-cv-01285 GSA (PC)

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW 

CAUSE WHY THIS MATTER SHOULD NOT 

BE SUMMARILY DISMISSED FOR 

FAILURE TO EXHAUST 

ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

PLAINTIFF’S SHOWING OF CAUSE DUE 

IN FOURTEEN DAYS

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed this civil 

rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

For the reasons stated below, Plaintiff will be ordered to show cause why it should not be 

recommended that this matter be summarily dismissed for lack of jurisdiction given Plaintiff’s 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit in this Court. Plaintiff will be given 

fourteen days to file the showing of cause.

I. RELEVANT FACTS

On October 22, 2024, Plaintiff’s complaint and his application to proceed in forma 

pauperis were docketed. ECF Nos. 1, 2. Two days later, Plaintiff’s six-month prison trust fund 

Case 1:24-cv-01285-KES-GSA Document 8 Filed 11/26/24 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

account statement was docketed, and Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis was 

granted. ECF Nos. 6-7, respectively.

Plaintiff names T. Cook and A. Sanchez, both of whom are correctional officers at 

California State Prison – Corcoran (“CSP-Corcoran”), as well as a John Doe as Defendants in 

this action. See ECF No. 1 at 1, 4. In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges violations of right by 

Defendants under the Americans with Disabilities Act,1as well as violations of right under the 

Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment, i.e.., failure to protect and cruel and unusual punishment, 

stemming from events that occurred on September 14, 2024. See ECF No. 1 at 1-2, 5-7. He 

seeks $250,000.00 in compensatory damages; $25,000.00 for pain and suffering, and $25,000.00 

for mental anguish. Id. at 8.

In the complaint, Plaintiff states that there is a grievance procedure available at CSPCorcoran. ECF No. 1 at 3. However, when Plaintiff is asked on the complaint form whether he 

has completed the grievance procedure, Plaintiff states that he has not, that he is “still waiting for 

a response.” Id. He provides no other information in response to the question.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Applicable Law

The claims of inmates who challenge their conditions of confinement are subject to the 

Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). “The PLRA mandates that 

inmates exhaust all available administrative remedies before filing ‘any suit challenging prison 

conditions,’ including, but not limited to, suits under [Section] 1983.” Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 

1162, 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (brackets added) (quoting Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 85 (2006)).

“Under § 1997e(a), the exhaustion requirement hinges on the ‘availab[ility]’ of 

administrative remedies: An inmate . . . must exhaust available remedies, but need not exhaust

unavailable ones.” Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. 632, 642 (2016) (brackets in original). In discussing 

availability in Ross, the Supreme Court identified three circumstances in which administrative 

remedies were unavailable: (1) where an administrative remedy “operates as a simple dead end” 

1

 Plaintiff states that he is visually impaired and been diagnosed as legally blind. See ECF No. 1 

at 6.

Case 1:24-cv-01285-KES-GSA Document 8 Filed 11/26/24 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

in which officers are “unable or consistently unwilling to provide any relief to aggrieved 

inmates;” (2) where an administrative scheme is “incapable of use” because “no ordinary prisoner 

can discern or navigate it;” and (3) where “prison administrators thwart inmates from taking 

advantage of a grievance process through machination, misrepresentation, or intimidation.” Ross, 

136 S. Ct. at 1859-60. “[A]side from [the unavailability] exception, the PLRA’s text suggests no 

limits on an inmate’s obligation to exhaust – irrespective of any ‘special circumstances.’ ” Id. at 

1856. “[M]andatory exhaustion statutes like the PLRA establish mandatory exhaustion regimes, 

foreclosing judicial discretion.” Id. at 1857.

B. Analysis

The PLRA requires that a prisoner exhaust administrative remedies before submitting any 

papers to the federal courts. Vaden v. Summerhill, 449 F.3d 1047, 1048 (9th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff 

clearly states in his complaint that he has not done this. See ECF No. 1 at 3. In addition, his only 

reason for not having done so does not fall within any of the Ross exceptions. See id. Therefore, 

Plaintiff’s complaint is improperly before this Court. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (stating no action 

can be brought by a prisoner under Section 1983 with respect to prison conditions until available 

administrative remedies have been exhausted).

For these reasons, Plaintiff will be ordered to show cause why this matter should not be 

summarily dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. He will be given fourteen 

days to comply with this order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE why this matter should not be SUMMARILY 

DISMISSED for failure to exhaust administrative remedies (see ECF No. 1 at 3), and

2. Plaintiff’s showing of cause shall be filed within fourteen days from the date of this 

order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 26, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:24-cv-01285-KES-GSA Document 8 Filed 11/26/24 Page 3 of 3