Opinion ID: 221938
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Siggers's Grievance Filings

Text: As mentioned above, Siggers filed a Step I grievance after the September 15, 2006, mail rejection. Doc. 1 (Complaint at Exhibit F-5). In this grievance, he complains of numerous mail rejections; he mentions (1) the September 6, 2005 Notice, (2) several additional notices that he received after he spoke with Warden Jackson at the Warden's Forum on October 6, 2005 [4] , (3) the October 24, 2005 Notice, and (4) in the time after he was ordered to be taken to his civil trial, a half dozen additional notices from Ms. Campbell, rejecting legal documents sent to me; the latest of which is dated 9-12-06. Id. With respect to the first three of these and the first misconduct report, Siggers asserted that [t]hese actions were in retaliation for challenging the rejection of my legal documents and exercising my right of Access to Court. Id. At the end of the grievance, Siggers claims that [t]he previous and continuing aforementioned actions were and are in violation of my First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to Freedom of Speech, Access to Courts, Due Process and Freedom from Staff abuse of Authority. Id. This grievance was denied on October 16, 2006. Id. at Exhibit F-6. Siggers then filed a Step II grievance, claiming that the response to his first grievance is a misrepresentation of the facts, misinterpretation of policy and erroneously compounds the retaliatory actions of Mailroom Clerk Campbell and further interferes with my right of Access To Court. Id. at Exhibit G. The Grievance Coordinator acknowledged receipt of this Step II grievance and informed Siggers that if he did not receive a response by November 17, 2006, then Siggers may submit [a] Step III appeal. Id. at Exhibit J. Because he did not receive a response by November 17, Siggers claims that he filed his Step III appeal on November 24, 2006. Id. at ¶ 35; id. at Exhibit K-1. The Step III grievance was denied on July 16, 2007. Doc. 22-3 at 2 (Step III Grievance Response). It should also be noted that Siggers's Step II claim was denied on December 18, 2006; among other things, the denial stated that insofar as the grievance mentions Notices issued prior to September 12, 2006, the grievance could have been rejected at Step I as untimely. Id. at 4-6 (Step II Grievance Response) (citing P.D. 03.02.130). [5] Siggers filed a second grievance on April 8, 2007, on Ellen Campbell, NRF mail room Clerk and Lt. Minton, 6-2 shift, for conspiracy to deprive me of my civil rights by submitting false smuggling misconduct report and failing to follow proper policy and procedure. Doc. 23 at Exhibit S-1. This grievance was denied without processing because the issue(s) contained in the grievance are nongrievable per policy. Per PD-03.02.130  Prisoner/Parolee Grievances, decisions made by a Hearing Officer on Minor and Major misconducts ... and issues that are directly related to the hearing process are nongrievable. Your avenue of recourse is through the Request for Rehearing process within PD-03.03.105  Prisoner Discipline, and not through the prisoner grievance process. Id. at Exhibit S-2.