Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05727/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05727-2/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

VICTOR A. SANCHEZ, JR.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

DETENTION OFFICERS OF KERN

COUNTY SHERIFF’S LERDO JAIL,

Defendants.

 /

1:04-cv-05727-OWW-SMS-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 6)

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT/

ENTIRE ACTION

Plaintiff, Victor A. Sanchez, Jr. (“plaintiff”), is a state

prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil

rights action pursuant to 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 Rule 72-302.

On October 14, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which

contained notice to the parties that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. On November 21, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to extend

time. On December 15, 2005, the court granted plaintiff an

Case 1:04-cv-05727-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 02/16/06 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

27

28

2

additional thirty (30) days within which to respond. On December

21, 2005, plaintiff filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations. 

In his Objections, Plaintiff states that he filed a

citizen’s complaint and was informed that this was sufficient to

exhaust administrative remedies. (Objections at 2.) However,

this justification is insufficient to excuse exhaustion. As

noted in the Findings and Recommendations, the Prison Litigation

Reform Act requires exhaustion of administrative remedies. 42

U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Even assuming that Plaintiff was given

misinformation and was unaware that he could file more

administrative remedies, this is insufficient cause to excuse

exhaustion. Moreover, Plaintiff concedes that he only filed a

citizen’s complaint and nothing more. Thus, because it is clear

from the face of the Complaint and Objections Plaintiff did not

exhaust his administrative remedies,dismissal is warranted. 42

U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 (9th

Cir. 2003) (“A prisoner’s concession to nonexhaustion is a valid

grounds for dismissal . . . .”). Exhaustion must also occur

prior to filing suit and Plaintiff may not exhaust while the suit

is pending. McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th

Cir. 2002). Thus, Plaintiff may not proceed in federal court

until such administrative remedies are exhausted. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Case 1:04-cv-05727-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 02/16/06 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

27

28

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed October 14,

2005, are ADOPTED IN FULL; and,

2. This action is DISMISSED in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 16, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05727-OWW -SMS Document 12 Filed 02/16/06 Page 3 of 3