Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00582/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-00582-1/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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEN BURKE,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 13cv0582 DMS (WVG)

ORDER (1) ADOPTING IN PART AND

REJECTING IN PART REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION AND (2)

GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN

PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO

DISMISS

[Docket Nos. 18, 27] 

vs.

SCOTT STEADMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

This case comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the

Magistrate Judge to grant the motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint filed by Defendants Choo,

Cavender, Homer, Ridge and Steadman. Defendants moved to dismiss the Complaint on three

grounds. First, they argued Plaintiff’s claims for damages were barred by sovereign immunity.

Second, they asserted Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief were moot due to his transfer to a different

facility. Third, Defendants contended Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. The

Magistrate Judge agreed with Defendants’ first two arguments, but disagreed with Defendants’

arguments on exhaustion. Defendants filed objections to that portion of the R&R dealing with

exhaustion, and Plaintiff filed a reply to those objections.

Having reviewed de novo the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, this Court adopts the Magistrate

Judge’s recommendation on the issues of sovereign immunity and injunctive relief, and grants the

motion to dismiss on those grounds. 

/ / /

- 1 - 13cv0582

Case 3:13-cv-00582-DMS-WVG Document 32 Filed 04/15/14 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

However, the Court rejects the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation on the issue of exhaustion. 

In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit reversed Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2003), which

held exhaustion “‘is subject to an unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion rather than a motion for summary

judgment.’” Albino v. Baca, ___ F.3d ___, 2014 WL 1317141, at *4 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (quoting

Wyatt, 315 F.3d at 1119). Instead, the court held exhaustion should be raised through a motion for

summary judgment. Id. Defendants here followed the process set out in Wyatt, and moved for

dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to exhaust by filing an unenumerated motion under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). The Magistrate Judge properly considered the motion under

that Rule, given the state of the law at that time. In light of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Albino,

however, that is no longer the proper procedure for raising the issue of exhaustion. Accordingly, this

Court declines to adopt the Magistrate Judge’s discussion of that issue, and denies Defendants’ motion

to dismiss on that ground. 

In accordance with the R&R, Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without prejudice, and

Plaintiff is granted leave to file a First Amended Complaint that cures the pleading deficiencies set

out in the R&R. Indeed, in response to the R&R, Plaintiff submitted an Amended Complaint to the

Court for filing. The Amended Complaint names the individual Defendants in their individual

capacities as well as their official capacities, and thus appears to cure the pleading deficiency set out

in the R&R. Therefore, the Court will accept the Amended Complaint for filing in accordance with

this Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 15, 2014

HON. DANA M. SABRAW

United States District Judge

- 2 - 13cv0582

Case 3:13-cv-00582-DMS-WVG Document 32 Filed 04/15/14 Page 2 of 2