Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01803/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01803-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-1803

___________

Dwight R. Houston, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Larry Norris, Director, ADC; Greg *

Harmon, Warden, East Arkansas * Appeal from the United States

Regional Unit; Arkansas Department of * District Court for the

Correction, unknown officers, East * Eastern District of Arkansas

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Max *

Mobley, Deputy Director, ADC; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Correctional Medical Services, *

Administrator, ADC; John Doe, 1 & 2 *

(1 is Correctional Medical Services *

Staff) (2 is Classification Board *

Members), East Arkansas Regional *

Unit, ADC; Ms. Meano, Classification, *

East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; *

Holloway, Infirmary Administrator, *

East Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; *

Boyd, Director of Nursing, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Eifling, *

Grievance Officer, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; C.M. Layton, *

Sgt., East Arkansas Regional Unit, *

ADC; R. Lederman, Sgt., East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; T. *

Lewis, Sgt., East Arkansas Regional *

Unit, ADC; Ms. Mathis, Disciplinary *

Hearing Officer, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; Sgt. Mills, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Ms. *

Appellate Case: 06-1803 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2007 Entry ID: 3295865
1

The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District

of Arkansas. 

-2-

Morris, Nurse, East Arkansas Regional *

Unit, ADC; Dr. Plant, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; Lt. Thomas, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Watson, *

Assistant Warden, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; Sgt. Webber, East *

Arkansas Regional Unit, ADC; Dr. *

Yang, East Arkansas Regional Unit, *

ADC; D. Yarbrough, Regional *

Administrator, CMS, East Arkansas *

Regional Unit, ADC; Ms. Yates, Nurse *

Practitioner, East Arkansas Regional *

Unit, ADC; Delight Plott, Nurse *

Practitioner, East Arkansas Regional *

Unit, ADC, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: April 4, 2007

Filed: April 5, 2007

___________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Former Arkansas inmate Dwight R. Houston appeals the district court’s1

 orders

(1) dismissing certain defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and denying a preliminary

injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO); and (2) granting the remaining

Appellate Case: 06-1803 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2007 Entry ID: 3295865
-3-

defendants’ motion to reconsider their motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies, and dismissing the action. We affirm.

We lack jurisdiction to review the denial of a TRO, see Hamm v. Groose, 15

F.3d 110, 112-13 (8th Cir. 1994), and because Houston is no longer an inmate, the

preliminary-injunction issue is moot, cf. Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th

Cir. 1985) (claim for injunctive relief to improve prison conditions was moot when

prisoner was transferred and no longer subject to those conditions). As to the

dismissals under section 1915A and for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, we

find no basis for reversal. See Nerness v. Johnson, 401 F.3d 874, 876 (8th Cir. 2005)

(per curiam) (administrative exhaustion); Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th

Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (§ 1915A). The documents that Houston offered below

showed that he had not exhausted his claims when he filed his initial complaint. See

Jones v. Bock, 127 S. Ct. 910, 918-19, 923 (2007) (unexhausted claims cannot be

brought in court or considered). Even if Houston was prevented from fully exhausting

the grievance he filed in May 2005 about his revised medical classification and job

assignment, see Sergent v. Norris, 330 F.3d 1084, 1085-86 (8th Cir. 2003) (per

curiam) (remedy that prison official prevents inmate from using is not available), we

find that those defendants allegedly involved in the classification and job assignment

were properly dismissed for lack of service of process, or for failure to state a claim.

We also find no abuse of discretion in the denial of appointed counsel. See Phillips

v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-1803 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/05/2007 Entry ID: 3295865