Anthony Thomas v. John Mills, 16-10061

Plaintiff Anthony Deshawn Thomas, a Texas prisoner, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis.
District court dismissed his complaint on remand, granting defendants’ summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the PLRA.
Thomas contended on appeal that failure to exhaust was caused by defendants and jail staff (i.e., not his fault).
Record evidence showed Thomas received the inmate handbook, was repeatedly informed in writing of a 30-day appeal deadline and of the appeals procedure, and nonetheless failed to properly exhaust.
Thomas submitted an ‘‘Appeal Grievance / Letter’’ for the first time on appeal; the court refused to consider it because it was not presented to the district court.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed dismissal and denied Thomas’s motions for appointment of counsel and other relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Thomas exhausted available administrative remedies under the PLRA	Thomas argues his failure to exhaust was caused by defendants/jail staff and thus there is a genuine dispute of material fact	Defendants show competent summary judgment evidence that Thomas did not follow the grievance/appeal procedure and missed the 30-day appeal deadline	Court held Thomas failed to exhaust; summary judgment for defendants affirmed
Whether newly presented grievance evidence on appeal may be considered	Thomas submits a handwritten appeal letter on appeal to show exhaustion	Defendants argue record before district court lacked that document	Court held it will not consider evidence first presented on appeal; review is de novo but limited to district-court record
Whether appointment of counsel is warranted	Thomas moved for counsel, claiming need for assistance	Defendants opposed as unnecessary given simplicity of exhaustion issue	Court denied counsel, finding issue not complex and plaintiff capable of adequate presentation
Whether other pending motions should be granted	Thomas sought caption amendment and judicial notice	Defendants opposed; no basis shown to alter judgment	Court denied all other motions

Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (PLRA exhaustion requirement is mandatory)
Cowart v. Erwin, 837 F.3d 444 (5th Cir.) (Fifth Circuit applies strict approach to exhaustion)
Jones v. Lowndes County, Miss., 678 F.3d 344 (5th Cir.) (failure to show excuse for non-exhaustion insufficient to defeat summary judgment)