Price v. Robinson, 3:22-cv-02805

Plaintiff Christopher Price, formerly incarcerated at Centralia Correctional Center, alleges he was forced to transfer to a cellhouse with an inmate who had previously harassed him due to his sexual orientation.
Price notified correctional officers, including defendants Lieutenants Jack and Robinson, of his vulnerable status and safety concerns before the transfer, but they allegedly did not accommodate his request for protective custody.
On the same day as the transfer (February 25, 2022), Price was assaulted by the inmate he feared.
Price later filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. §1983, asserting an Eighth Amendment failure to protect claim.
Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing Price failed to exhaust required administrative remedies prior to litigation, a prerequisite for prisoner litigation under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
Price claimed he submitted an emergency grievance in February 2022 but received no response and subsequently filed related grievances months later, after transferring facilities.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Plaintiff exhaust required administrative remedies before suit?	Price claims he filed an emergency grievance at Centralia but received no response, and submitted follow-up grievances later.	Jack/Robinson argue Price did not exhaust because no timely grievance was filed or received as required.	Court finds Price failed to exhaust; claim dismissed without prejudice.
Was the administrative remedy process unavailable to Plaintiff?	Price asserts Centralia withheld his original grievance, making the process unavailable to him.	Defendants contend there is no evidence Centralia received or withheld a timely grievance; Price failed to retry within 60-day window.	Court finds process was available; Price should have re-submitted timely grievance.

Pozo v. McCaughtry, 286 F.3d 1022 (7th Cir. 2002) (prisoners must properly follow each administrative step to exhaust remedies)
Perez v. Wisconsin Dep’t of Corr., 182 F.3d 532 (7th Cir. 1999) (cases filed before exhaustion must be dismissed without court discretion)
Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007) (exhaustion aims to resolve complaints internally before litigation)
Cannon v. Washington, 418 F.3d 714 (7th Cir. 2005) (unavailable administrative remedies excused if process is truly unavailable)
Lewis v. Faulkner, 689 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1982) (summary judgment requirements for pro se prisoner plaintiffs)