T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dentexce ptundert he * doctr i nes of l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a and c ol l at er al es t oppel . I tm aybe ci t ed, h o w e v e r, fo r its p e rsu a siv e v a lu e c o n sis ten t w ith F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 2 .1 a n d 1 0 th C i r . R . 32. 1. A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s t hr ee-j udge ** panel has det erm i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notbe of mat er i al a s s is ta n c e in th e d e te rm in a tio n o f th is a p p e a l. See F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a u se is th e re fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### A p ril16,2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT DAVI D L . HI L L I AR D,

P lain tiff-A p p e llan t, N o. 06- 7062 v . (E .D . o f O k la .) CH AR L E S RA Y, Wa r d e n , J OE C R O W , W are h o u se S u p erv isor, ST E V E K A I SE R , Pr evi ous W ar den, R O B E R T E Z E L L , A s s i s t antW ar den, DA VI S CORR ECTI ON AL FA CI LI TY M E D I C A L D E PA R T M E N T , and OKL AHOMA DE P AR T M E NT OF CO RR EC TI O N S,

D efen dan t s- A pp el l ees. ( D . C. N o. CV - 05 - 15 4- S)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T * B efor e HENR Y , TY M KOVI CH , and HO LM ES , C i rcui tJudg es. ** D a v id L . H ill iar d , an O k lah o m a sta te p riso n e r, p ro c e e d in g p ro se , ap p e a ls t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s di s m i s s al of hi s cl ai m agai ns ts ever al pr i s on offi ci al s for-2-

fa il u re to p rov ide a d eq u ate m ed ical care . T h e d istri ct co u rtd ism issed H il li ard ’s compl ai ntbeca us e H i l l i ar d fai l ed t o demonstr at e exha us t i on of hi s admi ni s tr at i ve r emedi es as t o al l cl ai m s . T o s uppor tthe r equi r ementthata pr i s oner ’ s compl ai nt m us tdemonstr at e t ot al admi ni s t r at i ve exha us t i on, the di s tr i ctcourtr el i ed on St eele v. Fed. B ur eau of P r is ons , 355 F. 3d 1204, 1209–10 ( 10th C i r . 2003) ( hol di ng pr i s oner s have the bur den of pl eadi ng exhaus t i on) and R os s v. C ount y of B e rn a lil lo , 36 5 F . 3d 11 81 , 11 89 (10t h C i r. 20 04 ) ( ho l ding pri soner m ustexh aust re m e d ie s o n a ll c la im s p re s e n te d ). I n Fr eem an v. Watki ns , 4 7 9 F . 3 d 1 2 5 7 ( 1 0 th Ci r . 2 0 0 7 ) , h o we v e r , we r ece nt l yr ecogni zed thatt he Supr eme C our t ’ s deci s i on i n Jones v. B ock , 12 7 S. C t . 910 ( 2007) , overrul ed both St eele and R oss . A ccor di ngl y , H i l l i ar d need not s h o w in h is c o m p la in t th a t h e h a s a d m in is tr a tiv e ly ex h a u s te d h is c la im s . See Jones , 127 S. C t . at921. R ather , the defendant s m ayr ai s e fa i l ur e t o exhaus tas an a ffir m a tiv e d e fe n s e . S e e id . Fur therm or e, H i l l i ar d m aypr ocee d on hi s exhaus t ed c la im s e v e n if

h e h a s n o t e x h a u s te d o th e rs . S e e id . at923–26. T he di s t r i ctcour tal s o det erm i ned H i l l i ar d’ s act i on w as fr i vol ous and s houl d be di s m i s s ed under28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( pr ovi di ng thatw hen a c our thas author i zed a n act i on t o pr ocee d in fo rm a p a u p e ris , the co urtshal l dis m i ss the case i f i tt her eaf

t erdet erm i nes t he ac t i on i s fr i vol ous ) . B eca us e the courtdevot ed the s ubs t ance of i t s or dert o di s cus s i ng ournow - s uper cede d pr ece dentr equi r i ng an i nm at e t o adequa t el ypl ead e xhaus t i on, w e w i l l tr eatthe court ’ s fi ndi ng of-3-

fr i vol ous nes s as bas ed on thatpr ece dentand notas an i ndepende ntgr ound for d ism iss a l. In li g h t of

the fo reg o ing d iscu ssion , w e V A C A T E the d istri ct co u rt ’s deci s i on and R E M A N D forfur t herpr ocee di ngs i n acc or dance w i th Jones v. B ock . W e r emi nd H i l l i ar d of hi s obl i gat i on, underthe di s tr i ctcour t ’ s or dergr ant i ng l eave t o pr ocee d in fo rm a p a up e ris , t o cont i nue maki ng part i al paym ent s on the fi l i ng fee unt i l t he ent i r e fe e has been pa i d. E n tered fo r th e C o u rt T i m othyM . T ym kovi ch C i r cui tJ udge