Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00105/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00105-12/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LANARD KITCHENS,

Plaintiff,

v.

TORDSEN, et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. 1:12-cv-0105-AWI-MJS (PC)

ORDER DENYING UNENUMERATED 

RULE 12(b) MOTION WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

(ECF No. 53) 

Plaintiff Lanard Kitchens, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter proceeds on a First 

Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Tordsen and a Fourteenth Amendment due 

process claim against Defendants Tordsen, Coker, Leach, and Day. 

On January 1, 2014, Defendants Coker, Day, Leach, and Tordsen filed a motion to 

dismiss the action under the unenumerated provisions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

12(b) for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 53); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b). 

On April 3, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a 

decision overruling Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th Cir. 2003) with respect to 

the proper procedural device for raising the issue of administrative exhaustion. Albino v. 

Baca, No. 10-55702, 2014 WL 1317141, at *1 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en banc). Following 

the decision in Albino, Defendants may raise the issue of exhaustion in either (1) a motion 

Case 1:12-cv-00105-SJM-MJS Document 66 Filed 05/12/14 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

to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), in the rare event the failure to exhaust is clear on the 

face of the complaint, or (2) a motion for summary judgment. Albino, 2014 WL 1317141, at 

*4. An unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion is no longer the proper procedural device for 

raising the issue of exhaustion. Id. 

For the reasons stated, the unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion is procedurally 

deficient in light of the decision in Albino. The unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion shall be 

denied, without prejudice, on procedural grounds.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the unenumerated 

Rule 12(b) motion filed January 3, 2014 (ECF No. 53) is DENIED, without prejudice, on 

procedural grounds.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2014 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00105-SJM-MJS Document 66 Filed 05/12/14 Page 2 of 2