Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01953/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01953-0/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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Mebrhato Tsehai,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 05-1953 GEB PAN P

vs. Order

Teresa A. Schwartz, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff, a state prisoner without counsel, is pursuing a

civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and seeks leave to

proceed in forma pauperis. 

Title 42 of the United States Codes § 1997e(a) provides a

prisoner may bring no § 1983 action until he has exhausted such

administrative remedies as are available. The requirement is

mandatory. Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). The

administrative remedy must be exhausted before suit is brought

and a prisoner is not entitled to a stay of judicial proceedings 

Case 2:05-cv-01953-GEB-PAN Document 3 Filed 09/30/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

in order to exhaust. McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir.

2002). A prisoner’s concession of nonexhaustion is a valid

ground for dismissal of an action. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d

1108 (9th Cir. 2003). 

The California Department of Corrections provides an

administrative remedy for most grievances. Title 15 of the

California Administrative Code §§ 3084.1, et seq., provide an

elaborate administrative remedy to state prisoners and parolees. 

California prisoners or parolees may appeal “any departmental

decision, action, condition, or policy which they can demonstrate

as having an adverse effect upon their welfare.” Assistance is

available to those who have difficulty communicating in and

writing English. Forms are available and mandatory. Assurances

are given against reprisals, though it remains a violation of

state penal code knowingly to make a false complaint against a

peace officer and if a prisoner is found to abuse the grievance

process by filing excessive numbers of grievances, his access to

the process may be severely limited. The scheme requires in most

cases the prisoner attempt to resolve his grievance informally at

the lowest possible level and staff are obliged to attempt

practical resolution of the grievance within ten work days after

receipt. Appeals coordinators coordinate processing formal

appeals. The first level of formal appeal must be decided by

someone not involved in the dispute who is at least equal in rank

to the highest ranking person that was involved. The prisoner is 

entitled to a response at that level within 30 work days. If

Case 2:05-cv-01953-GEB-PAN Document 3 Filed 09/30/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

dissatisfied, the prisoner may seek review by the warden or his

designee and a response at this second level is required in most

cases within 20 work days. If the prisoner still is not

satisfied, he may seek review by the director of the department,

who has 60 days to make a decision which is final. The scheme

authorizes exceptions to the time limits in some cases. At each

level, a written response is given to the prisoner.

It appears this administrative remedy was available to

plaintiff because he alleges he was placed in administrative

segregation in violation of due process. These are conditions of

confinement within the scope of the department’s appeal process. 

The complaint indicates plaintiff has not availed himself of this

process.

Accordingly, within 20 days plaintiff shall show cause in

writing why the court should not deny his request pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915 for authority to commence an action in forma

pauperis due to his failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 

So ordered.

Dated: September 29, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01953-GEB-PAN Document 3 Filed 09/30/05 Page 3 of 3