Opinion
CIVIL 3:15cv675 (JBA)
10-28-2022
QUAN MORGAN, Plaintiff, v. CAPTAIN WATSON, et al. Defendants.
ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON THE EFFECT OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT ON ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE 9.6
Janet Bond Arterton, U.S.D.J.
The Court requests additional briefing on the following questions to guide its consideration of Defendants' argument that Plaintiff's Claims Two through Four are barred by the PLRA's exhaustion requirement (Defs.' Mem. [Doc. # 64-1] at 5-9).
1. Is Administrative Directive 9.6 (Defs.' Ex. A [Doc. # 64-5]) a regulation under the Connecticut Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (UAPA), or is it an administrative directive exempt from UAPA rulemaking procedures?
2. Assuming that Administrative Directive 9.6 is exempt from the UAPA, which state regulations is it interpreting?
3. Is Administrative Directive 9.6 within the scope of any regulations identified in Question 2?
4. If Administrative Directive 9.6 is found not to have been properly promulgated under the UAPA or is beyond the scope of the state regulations it purports to interpret, what is the impact on the PLRA's exhaustion requirement? Parties are directed to file the requested additional briefing by November 14, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED.