Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00298/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00298-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUDY AROCHA, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-07-0298 LKK KJM P

vs.

DIRECTOR, CDCR, et al., 

Defendants. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a state prison inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under

42 U.S.C. § 1983. In the body of the complaint, he notes that he has filed an emergency

grievance concerning the matters raised in his lawsuit, but that the grievance process has not

been completed.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) provides that “[n]o action shall be

brought with respect to prison conditions under section 1983 of this title, . . . until such

administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The grievance

process must be completed before the inmate files suit; exhaustion during the pendency of the

litigation will not save an action from dismissal. McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th

Cir. 2002). A prisoner’s concession of failure to exhaust is a proper basis for dismissal. Wyatt

/////

Case 2:07-cv-00298-LKK -KJM Document 5 Filed 05/30/07 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

2

v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th Cir. 2003). Plaintiff’s concession that he has not

completed the grievance process means that the action must be dismissed. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: May 29, 2007. 

2

aroc0298.56

Case 2:07-cv-00298-LKK -KJM Document 5 Filed 05/30/07 Page 2 of 2