Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_06-cv-00203/USCOURTS-ared-5_06-cv-00203-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

JAMES SWAIM PLAINTIFF

VS. CASE NO. 5:06CV00203 JMM

VERNON ROBERTSON,

DANNY BURL AND

SANGEETA DOSHI DEFENDANT

ORDER

Pending is plaintiff’s Motion to Amend which the Court has construed as a motion for

reconsideration (#29). Plaintiff seeks to have the Court consider additional arguments regarding

his complaint and reconsider the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. The Court dismissed

plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice after adopting Magistrate Judge H. David Young’s Proposed

Findings and Recommendations which stated that based upon plaintiff’s own statements he had

failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing his complaint.

In his Motion to Amend, plaintiff states that the grievances related to the issues raised in his

complaint are still pending. This statement, again, demonstrates that plaintiff has failed to exhaust

his administrative remedies before filing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. See 42 U.S.C. §

1997e(a) (exhaustion of administrative remedies is mandatory); Abdul-Muhammad v. Kempker, 450

F.3d 350 (8th Cir. 2006) (§ 1997e(a) requires an inmate to exhaust all available prison grievance

remedies as to all of his claims prior to filing suit in federal court).

Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend is denied (#29).

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 29 day of November, 2006.

 

James M. Moody

United States District Judge

Case 5:06-cv-00203-JMM Document 30 Filed 11/29/06 Page 1 of 1