Opinion
1:19-cv-01456-NE-JLT (PC)
08-26-2021
ALEJANDRO MADRID, Plaintiff, v. H. ANGLEA, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STAY RESOLUTION OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(DOC. 50)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On August 2, 2021, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. (Doc. 47.) On August 10, 2021, the Court stayed discovery on non-exhaustion related issues until the Court rules on Defendant's motion. (Doc. 49.) The Court additionally vacated the deadline for Defendant to file an opposition to Plaintiff's pending merits-based motion for summary judgment. (Id. at 1-2.)
On August 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay resolution of Defendant's exhaustion-based motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 50.) Plaintiff appears to argue that resolution of his merits-based motion for summary judgment (Doc. 39) will dispose of this case, and that conducting discovery related to “competing summary judgment motions” would be a waste of resources. (See Doc. 50 at 1-2.)
First, as stated above, the Court already stayed discovery on non-exhaustion-related matters and vacated the deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's merits-based motion for summary judgment. Thus, the parties are not obligated-and indeed may not-conduct discovery regarding Plaintiff's merits-based motion for summary judgment. Thus, there is no potential for wasting resources on “competing motions.”
Second, the Ninth Circuit has held that “[e]xhaustion should be decided, if feasible, before reaching the merits of a prisoner's claim[s].” Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1170 (9th Cir. 2014). The reason for this is that exhaustion of administrative remedies is mandatory and “unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 211 (citation omitted). Thus, “exhaustion is analogous to subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, venue, and abstention, in that all these matters are typically decided at the outset of the litigation.” Albino, 747 F.3d at 1170. Thus, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to stay resolution of Defendant's exhaustion-based motion for summary judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.