Opinion
No. 05-CV-1052-PHX-FJM.
December 14, 2005
ORDER
Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that the conditions of confinement at the Durango Jail violated his Eighth Amendment rights. Complaint at 4-6. The court has before it defendant's Motion to Dismiss (doc. 10). Plaintiff failed to file a response.
Plaintiff is precluded from bringing this action unless administrative remedies are exhausted. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Defendant argues that plaintiff failed to exhaust the required administrative remedies. Motion to Dismiss at 3-4. It is undisputed that plaintiff did not file a grievance as required by the Inmate Grievance Procedure. Complaint at 4-6; Motion to Dismiss, Exhibit A.
Plaintiff states that he did not submit a request for administrative relief because "[t]his is not a greivable matter."Complaint at 5-6. There is however no restriction on the type of grievance allowed pursuant to the Inmate Grievance Procedure.Motion to Dismiss at 3; Motion to Dismiss, Exhibit A.
Plaintiff also states that he did not submit a request for administrative relief because "[g]reivances are ignored and result in inmates being singled out for retaliation and additional restrictions." Complaint at 4. Without more, plaintiff's conclusory allegations are insufficient to prove that the administrative remedies are unavailable. Accordingly, we conclude that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.
Moreover, plaintiff's failure to respond to the Motion to Dismiss serves as an additional, independent reason to grant the motion. Failure to respond to a motion "may be deemed a consent to the . . . granting of the motion, and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily." LRCiv 7.2(i).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED GRANTING defendant's Motion to Dismiss (doc. 10).