Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05289/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05289-0/pdf.json

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESUS SILVA,

Plaintiff(s),

 vs.

JAMES TILTON, et al.,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-5289 CRB (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a state prisoner incarcerated at the Correctional Training Facility

in Soledad, has filed a pro se complaint for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

challenging the conditions of his confinement. Plaintiff has not exhausted

California's prison administrative process, however. 

The Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA") amended 42 U.S.C. §

1997e to provide that "[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). Although once

within the discretion of the district court, exhaustion in prisoner cases covered by

§ 1997e(a) is now mandatory. Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 524 (2002). All

available remedies must now be exhausted; those remedies "need not meet

federal standards, nor must they be 'plain, speedy, and effective.'" Id. (citation

Case 3:07-cv-05289-CRB Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 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

omitted). Even when the prisoner seeks relief not available in grievance

proceedings, notably money damages, exhaustion is a prerequisite to suit. Id.;

Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). Similarly, exhaustion is a

prerequisite to all prisoner suits about prison life, whether they involve general

circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege excessive force or

some other wrong. Porter, 534 U.S. at 532. PLRA's exhaustion requirement

requires "proper exhaustion" of available administrative remedies. Woodford v.

Ngo, 126 S. Ct. 2378, 2382 (2006).

The State of California provides its prisoners the right to appeal

administratively "any departmental decision, action, condition or policy

perceived by those individuals as adversely affecting their welfare." Cal. Code

Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.1(a). It also provides them the right to file appeals alleging

misconduct by correctional officers/officials. Id. § 3084.1(e). In order to exhaust

available administrative remedies within this system, a prisoner must proceed

through several levels of appeal: (1) informal resolution, (2) formal written

appeal on a CDC 602 inmate appeal form, (3) second level appeal to the

institution head or designee, and (4) third level appeal to the Director of the

California Department of Corrections. Barry v. Ratelle, 985 F. Supp. 1235, 1237

(S.D. Cal. 1997) (citing Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.5). A final decision from

the Director’s level of review satisfies the exhaustion requirement under §

1997e(a). Id. at 1237-38. 

 Nonexhaustion under § 1997e(a) is an affirmative defense which should

be brought by defendant(s) in an unenumerated motion to dismiss under Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12 (b). Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119 (9th Cir.

2003). However, a complaint may be dismissed by the court for failure to

exhaust if a prisoner “conce[des] to nonexhaustion” and “no exception to

Case 3:07-cv-05289-CRB Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 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 G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.07\Silva, J1.or1.wpd 3

exhaustion applies.” Id. at 1120. Here, plaintiff concedes he did not exhaust

available administrative remedies through the Director’s level of review before

filing suit and does not present any extraordinary circumstances which might

compel that he be excused from doing so. Cf. Booth, 532 U.S. at 741 n.6 (courts

should not read "futility or other exceptions" into § 1997e(a)).

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling

after exhausting California's prison administrative process. See McKinney v.

Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1201 (9th Cir. 2002) (action must be dismissed

without prejudice unless prisoner exhausted available administrative remedies

before he filed suit, even if prisoner fully exhausts while the suit is pending).

The clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this order and close the

file. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 28, 2007 

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05289-CRB Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 Page 3 of 3