Leslie Vanaman v. Jt Shartle
696 F. App'x 262
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Federal prisoner Leslie Grey Vanaman sued federal officials under Bivens alleging constitutional violations; the district court granted summary judgment for defendants.
- District court concluded Vanaman failed to exhaust administrative remedies and failed to show that administrative remedies were effectively unavailable.
- Vanaman also asserted later-arising claims against defendants Hubble and Sargent; the district court granted summary judgment on those claims as well.
- Vanaman moved to deny further time extensions and sought an order under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2)(A) to shift service costs to defendants; the court denied these motions.
- Vanaman appealed pro se to the Ninth Circuit, which reviewed de novo and affirmed the district court; the court also denied his motions for judicial notice and for appellate costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Vanaman properly exhausted administrative remedies | Vanaman contends he pursued grievances and thus exhausted available remedies | Defendants argue Vanaman did not use all agency steps or did not do so properly | Court held Vanaman failed to raise a genuine dispute that he properly exhausted; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable | Vanaman argues threats/conditions made the grievance process unavailable to him | Defendants contend no objective basis showed the system was unavailable | Court held Vanaman did not show remedies were effectively unavailable under Ross and McBride standards |
| Sufficiency of later-arising claims against Hubble and Sargent | Vanaman argued these claims should survive summary judgment | Defendants maintained claims were also unexhausted or meritless | Court rejected Vanaman’s contention and affirmed summary judgment on those claims |
| Whether defendants should be ordered to pay service costs under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2)(A) | Vanaman sought fees/costs because defendants did not waive service | Defendants argued any failure to waive did not cause Vanaman expenses and there was no good cause to shift costs | Court denied relief: Vanaman did not show good cause or that he personally incurred service-related costs |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (establishing a damages remedy for certain constitutional violations by federal officers)
- Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850 (2016) (defining when administrative remedies are "unavailable" for exhaustion purposes)
- Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) (holding exhaustion requires using all agency steps the agency holds out and doing so properly)
- McBride v. Lopez, 807 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2015) (to show grievance system was unavailable due to threats, prisoner must show he actually believed officials would retaliate and that belief was objectively reasonable)