Background

• Harding, an inmate at Eastern Correctional Institution, alleges due process violations from administrative segregation and ADA/RA claims for lack of outdoor exercise.
• He was transferred from Western Correctional Institution to ECI in Nov 2008, with a recommendation to continue protective custody due to his law enforcement background.
• Security classifications on May 11, 2009 and May 5, 2010 kept Harding in protective custody; no disability diagnosed and no prescription for exercise.
• Feb 16, 2011 segregation review advised return to general population but kept in administrative segregation due to housing problems; similar conclusions on Mar 25, Apr 14, and Apr 30, 2011.
• Harding filed three ARPs since Jan 1, 2011 challenging placement in admin segregation; all were dismissed by the Warden and were not appealed.
• The court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, concluding Harding failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the PLRA.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (Supreme Court 2002) (exhaustion required for prison-conditions claims)
• Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231 (4th Cir. 1999) (PPushes that pleadings alone cannot survive without factual support)
• Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (Supreme Court 1986) (the standard for summary judgment)
• Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Football Club, Inc., 346 F.3d 514 (4th Cir. 2003) (nonmovant must set forth specific facts showing a genuine issue)
• Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731 (Supreme Court 2001) (never sought further administrative review after denial)
• Thomas v. Woolum, 337 F.3d 720 (6th Cir. 2003) (must appeal through highest administrative level)
• Pozo v. McCaughtry, 286 F.3d 1022 (7th Cir. 2002) (prisoner must follow all administrative steps)
• Gibbs v. Bureau of Prisons, 986 F. Supp. 941 (D. Md. 1997) (dismissing federal prisoner’s suit for failure to exhaust)