Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00453/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00453-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN HAYS,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASCO PRISON MEDICAL DOCTORS, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:15-cv-00453 LJO JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

TO DISMISS ACTION WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE, FOR FAILUE TO EXHAUST

PRIOR TO FILING SUIT

(Doc. 1)

In this action, Jonathan Hays, complains about medical treatment he has received at his 

place of incarceration. However, in his complaint, Plaintiff conceded that, while there is a 

grievance procedure at his institution, he did not present the facts in his complaint for review 

through the grievance procedure, explaining that he had a broken leg that needed to be fixed 

"ASAP." (Doc. 1, Comp., pp. 1-2.) As a result, it appeared Plaintiff filed suit prematurely 

without first exhausting his administrative remedies in compliance with section 1997e(a). Thus,

the Court issued an order to Plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for his 

failure to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. (Doc. 10.) 

The OSC was served on Plaintiff that same day and provided a twenty-one day deadline 

for Plaintiff to respond. (Id.) The deadline has long since lapsed and Plaintiff has neither filed a 

response to the OSC, nor shown cause in any other way as to why the action should not be 

dismissed.

Case 1:15-cv-00453-LJO-JLT Document 12 Filed 05/06/15 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

Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, “[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). Prisoners are required to exhaust the available 

administrative remedies prior to filing suit. Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211, 127 S.Ct. 910 

(2007); McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002). Exhaustion is required 

regardless of the relief sought by the prisoner and regardless of the relief offered by the process, 

Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819 (2001), and the exhaustion requirement 

applies to all suits relating to prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 435 U.S. 516, 532, 122 S.Ct. 983 

(2002). 

Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, 

for Plaintiff's failure to exhaust prior to filing suit. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 (9th 

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

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 30 

days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff may file written 

objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 

specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 

839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00453-LJO-JLT Document 12 Filed 05/06/15 Page 2 of 2