United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2021

(PC) Sanchez v. Eaton

(PC) Sanchez v. Eaton
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided September 8, 2021
(PC) Sanchez v. Eaton

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GABRIEL CHARLES SANCHEZ, Case No. 1:21-cv-00736-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR 13 v. FAILURE TO EXHAUST PATRICK EATON, et al., 21-DAY DEADLINE 15 Defendants.

17 Gabriel Charles Sanchez alleges the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his health by exposing him to COVID-19. (Doc. 1.) In his complaint, Plaintiff indicates that he has not filed an administrative grievance regarding his claims. (Id. at 3, 4.)

20 The Prison Litigation Reform Act provides that “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under . . . 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.”

23 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Exhaustion of administrative remedies is mandatory and “unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211 (citation omitted). The exhaustion requirement applies to all inmate suits relating to prison life, Porter v. Nussle, 534 26 U.S. 516, 532 (2002), regardless of the relief sought by the prisoner or offered by the administrative process, Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741 (2001). Inmates are required to “complete the administrative review process in accordance with the applicable procedural rules, including deadlines, as a precondition to bringing suit in federal court.” Woodford v. Ngo, 548 2 U.S. 81, 88, 93 (2006). Generally, failure to exhaust is an affirmative defense that the defendant must plead and prove. Jones, 549 U.S. at 204, 216. However, courts may dismiss a claim if failure to exhaust is clear on the face of the complaint. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1166 (9th Cir. 2014).

6 It is clear on the face of his complaint that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. Accordingly, within 21 days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff SHALL show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to exhaust. Alternatively, within that same time, Plaintiff may file a notice of voluntary dismissal.

11 IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 Dated: September 7, 2021 _ /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.