Lee v. Benuelos

Summary

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal without prejudice of Mario Anton Lee's Bivens action against federal prison officials for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The court held that Lee had not properly completed the Bureau of Prisons' grievance process before filing suit, that prison officials had not rendered the remedies unavailable, and that no evidentiary hearing or stay was required.

Holdings

1. Lee failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he had not refiled his administrative remedy requests with FCI Florence as directed by the Bureau of Prisons before filing his complaint.
2. The administrative remedies remained available because Lee identified no evidence that prison officials prevented, thwarted, or hindered his ability to refile the requests at the institutional level.
3. The district court was not required to conduct an evidentiary hearing before ruling on defendants' summary-judgment motion.
4. Lee was not entitled to a stay because the current version of the PLRA makes exhaustion a mandatory precondition to bringing suit and requires dismissal when available remedies have not been exhausted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Lee exhausted the administrative remedies available to him before filing his Bivens action.
2. Whether prison officials rendered the administrative remedies unavailable by preventing, thwarting, or hindering Lee's efforts to pursue them.
3. Whether the district court was required to conduct an evidentiary hearing before granting summary judgment on exhaustion.
4. Whether the district court should have stayed the action for ninety days rather than dismissing it so Lee could complete exhaustion.

Disposition

affirmed