Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00307/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00307-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HENRY A. JONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

MILLIGAN, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 05 307 AWI SMS P 

ORDER DISREGARDING MOTION 

(Doc. 17.) 

 Henry A. Jones (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil action. 

Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by federal

actors. 

Plaintiff filed the instant action on February 24, 2005. On June 29, 2005, Plaintiff filed a

pleading he titled “Motion: Citizen Complaint Demand For Jury Trial.” In this document,

Plaintiff indicates that he filed a complaint against CDC personnel for conspiracy to cover up

mail destruction and conspiracy to commit murder and makes a demand for a jury trial. Plaintiff

also attaches a copy of the complaint to the Motion. However, other than his demand for a jury

trial, it is wholly unclear what the purpose of this Motion is. To the extent the Motion seeks to

add new claims and defendants to the action, the Motion would be denied. As a preliminary

matter, the events at issue in the Motion occurred after the filing of this action as they occurred

on March 3, 2005 and thus, the claims appear to be unexhausted. 

Case 1:05-cv-00307-SMS Document 19 Filed 01/20/06 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

Thus, before filing an action in the U.S. District Court, a federal prisoner challenging any

circumstance of imprisonment must first exhaust all administrative remedies. Booth v. Churner,

121 S.Ct. 1819 (2001); see also MacCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140, 144-145, 112 S.Ct. 1081,

1086-87 (1992); Western Radio Services Co. v. Espay, 79 F.3d 896, 899 (9th Cir. 1996);

Martinez v. Roberts, 804 F.2d 570, 571 (9th Cir. 1986); Chua Han Mow v. United States, 730

F.2d 1308, 1313 (9th Cir. 1984); Ruviwat v. Smith, 701 F.2d 844, 845 (9th Cir. 1983). The

Bureau of Prisons has established an administrative remedy procedure governing prisoner

complaints. The procedure is set forth at 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 et. seq. Thus, any amendment of

the new claims and Defendants to this action would result in their dismissal. 

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The “Motion: Citizen Complaint” is DISREGARDED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 19, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00307-SMS Document 19 Filed 01/20/06 Page 2 of 2