Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-04646/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-04646-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLOS MANWELL DAWSON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DAVID MEDINA, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 13-04646 YGR (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also seeks

leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff has not exhausted California's

prison administrative process, however. 

 The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA") amended 42 U.S.C. § 1997e to provide

that "[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). Although once

within the discretion of the district court, exhaustion in prisoner cases covered by § 1997e(a) is now

mandatory. Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 524 (2002). All available remedies must now be

exhausted; those remedies "need not meet federal standards, nor must they be 'plain, speedy, and

effective.'" Id. (citation omitted). Even when the prisoner seeks relief not available in grievance

proceedings, notably money damages, exhaustion is a prerequisite to suit. Id.; Booth v. Churner,

532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). Similarly, exhaustion is a prerequisite to all prisoner suits about prison

life, whether they involve general circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege

excessive force or some other wrong. Porter, 534 U.S. at 532. PLRA's exhaustion requirement

requires "proper exhaustion" of available administrative remedies. Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81,

94 (2006). The State of California provides its prisoners the right to appeal administratively "any

departmental decision, action, condition or policy perceived by those individuals as adversely

affecting their welfare." Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.1(a). It also provides them the right to file

Case 4:13-cv-04646-YGR Document 18 Filed 01/03/14 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

G:\PRO-SE\YGR\CR.13\Dawson4646.DISM(unexh).wpd 2

appeals alleging misconduct by correctional officers/officials. Id. § 3084.1(e). In order to exhaust

available administrative remedies within this system, a prisoner must proceed through several levels

of appeal: (1) informal resolution; (2) formal written appeal on a CDC 602 inmate appeal form;

(3) second level appeal to the institution head or designee; and (4) third level appeal to the Director

of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Barry v. Ratelle, 985 F. Supp. 1235,

1237 (S.D. Cal. 1997) (citing Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.5). A final decision from the Director's

level of review satisfies the exhaustion requirement under § 1997e(a). Id. at 1237-38. 

 Non-exhaustion under § 1997e(a) is an affirmative defense which should be brought by

defendants in an unenumerated motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). 

Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th Cir. 2003). However, a complaint may be dismissed by

the court for failure to exhaust if a prisoner "conce[des] to nonexhaustion" and "no exception to

exhaustion applies." Id. at 1120. Here, Plaintiff concedes he has not exhausted his administrative

remedies. Plaintiff has not presented any extraordinary circumstances which might compel that he

be excused from complying with PLRA's exhaustion requirement. Cf. Booth, 532 U.S. at 741 n.6

(courts should not read "futility or other exceptions" into § 1997e(a)). 

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling after exhausting

California's prison administrative process. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th

Cir. 2002) (action must be dismissed without prejudice unless prisoner exhausted available

administrative remedies before he filed suit, even if prisoner fully exhausts while the suit is

pending). 

The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment, close the file and terminate any pending

motions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 3, 2014 

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:13-cv-04646-YGR Document 18 Filed 01/03/14 Page 2 of 2