Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00392/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00392-3/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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LARRY HINES, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NORIEGA, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:13-cv-0392 JAM AC P 

ORDER 

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S. § 1983. 

Pending before the court is defendant Noriega’s fully briefed motion to dismiss the amended 

complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, pursuant to non-enumerated Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12(b), and for failure to state a claim, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). ECF Nos. 18, 22, 

23. 

 On April 3, 2014, the Ninth Circuit overruled Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th 

Cir. 2003) and held that the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1997e(a) should in most cases be presented in a motion for summary judgment rather than a 

motion to dismiss under unenumerated Rule 12(b). Albino v. Baca, No. 10-55702, 2014 WL 

1317141 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en banc). Because defendant Noriega has moved for dismissal 

of the amended complaint as administratively unexhausted pursuant to Rule 12(b), and has not 

Case 2:13-cv-00392-JAM-AC Document 24 Filed 04/10/14 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 

2

complied with the requirements of Rule 56, the court will vacate the motion and direct the 

defendant to file within fourteen (14) days a motion that complies with Albino. The portion of 

defendant’s motion that asserts failure to state a claim, and does not involve administrative 

exhaustion, may be refiled as a separate motion or in combination with a motion for summary 

judgment pursuant to Rule 56 regarding plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust. 

 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 

 1. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 18) is vacated; 

 2. Defendant may, within fourteen days, bring a motion for summary judgment pursuant 

to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 on the issue of administrative exhaustion. In doing so, defendant must 

provide plaintiff with the notice required under Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 

1998) (en banc); 

3. Defendant may, within fourteen days, re-file that portion of the vacated motion brought 

pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) in a separate motion or in combination with any motion for summary 

judgment regarding the exhaustion of administrative remedies. 

DATED: April 10, 2014 

Case 2:13-cv-00392-JAM-AC Document 24 Filed 04/10/14 Page 2 of 2