Ingram v. Watson

Dist. Ct. properly dismissed two counts of plaintiff-prisoner’s section 1983 action against defendants-prison officials, where record showed that plaintiff had failed to exhaust his internal administrative remedies prior to filing instant lawsuit.. However, with respect to third count, where plaintiff alleged that prison guards beat him, record showed that: (1) plaintiff had failed to attach Regional Director’s response to his grievance and had thereafter filed instant lawsuit; and (2) plaintiff subsequently received said response after instant lawsuit had been filed. While Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies because he should have treated his failure to receive response as non-response and then appealed his grievance to General Counsel, relevant regulations did not cover instant circumstance where response was actually generated but not timely delivered to plaintiff. Ct. of Appeals further found that remand was required for Pavey hearing to determine circumstances surrounding tardy delivery of said response and to determine truth of plaintiff’s claim that prison guard told him that he would not get said response. Ultimately, plaintiff’s claim could proceed if there was determination that any internal appeal was not available to plaintiff, where Bureau of Prisons declined to share its written response with plaintiff.