Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00339/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00339-10/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

AARON S. HARPER,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0339 FCD JFM P

vs.

DENISE L. HARMON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On August 30, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Defendants

have filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-

304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00339-FCD-JFM Document 50 Filed 09/28/06 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

The court also notes that the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations 1

regarding the exhaustion of administrative remedies is supported by the Ninth Circuit’s decision

in Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d 926 (9th Cir. 2005). In Brown, the court held “that a prisoner need

not press on to exhaust further levels of review once he has either received all ‘available’

remedies at an intermediate level of review or been reliably informed by an administrator that no

remedies are available.” Id. at 935. In applying that standard to the facts of Brown’s case, the

Ninth Circuit found that the plaintiff had adequately exhausted administrative remedies where

the Appeal Decision at the second level of review provided that his appeal was partially granted,

that an investigation would commence, and did not counsel that any further review was available. 

Id. at 936.

In this case, plaintiff’s grievance appeal was granted at the second level of review. 

The reviewing officer directed that plaintiff be referred to a Classification Committee who shall

dismiss the RVR Log, restore his LOC, readjust his classification points, remove that RCR from

the C-file, and “address all adverse affects due to his previous finding of guilt of a serious RVR.” 

(Defs.’ Ex. A to Mot. for Summ. J., filed Jan. 20, 2006, at 30). It does not appear from the

record that plaintiff was advised that further review was available. Further, defendants do not

point to any evidence in the record which “contradicts the conclusion that no further relief was

‘available’ through the appeals process” once plaintiff’s appeal was granted. Therefore, plaintiff

exhausted such administrative remedies as are available. 

2

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by

proper analysis.

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 30, 2006, are adopted in full;

2. Defendants’ January 20, 2006 motion for summary judgment is denied; and

3. This matter is referred back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

DATED:September 28, 2006

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00339-FCD-JFM Document 50 Filed 09/28/06 Page 2 of 2