Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00453/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00453-1/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN HAYS,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASCO PRISON MEDICAL DOCTORS, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-00453-JLT (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO 

SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD 

NOT BE DISMISSED, WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE, FOR FAILUE TO EXHAUST

PRIOR TO FILING SUIT

(Doc. 1)

21-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff, Jonathan Hays, claims he suffered a violation of his Eighth Amendments rights 

related to the medical treatment he received and failed to receive related to an injury to his leg.

Notably, however, the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides,“[n]o action shall be 

brought with respect to prison conditions under [42 U.S.C. § 1983], or any other Federal law, 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(a). Prisoners are required to exhaust 

the available administrative remedies before filing suit. Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211 (2007); 

McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). Exhaustion is required regardless 

of the relief sought by the prisoner and regardless of the relief offered by the process, Booth v. 

Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001), and the exhaustion requirement applies to all suits relating to 

prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 435 U.S. 516, 532 (2002). 

In his complaint, Plaintiff concedes that while there is a grievance procedure at the 

Case 1:15-cv-00453-LJO-JLT Document 10 Filed 03/26/15 Page 1 of 2
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

institution, he did not present the facts in his complaint for review through the grievance 

procedure, explaining that he had a broken leg that needed to be fixed "ASAP." (Doc. 1, Comp., 

pp. 1-2.) Thus, it appears Plaintiff filed suit prematurely without first exhausting the 

administrative remedies in compliance with section 1997e(a).

Accordingly, Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to show cause in writing within 21 days

from the date of service of this order, why this action should not be dismissed, without prejudice, 

for failure to exhaust prior to filing suit. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 (9th Cir. 2003) 

(“A prisoner’s concession to nonexhaustion is a valid ground for dismissal. . . .”). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00453-LJO-JLT Document 10 Filed 03/26/15 Page 2 of 2