REID v. EMMERICH, 2:10-cv-00144

Reid is incarcerated at FCI Terre Haute and brings Bivens claims against Lt. Emmerich, Usrey, and Counselor White regarding a December 10, 2009 incident and related medical/mail issues.
The court must decide whether Reid properly exhausted administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act before filing suit.
BOP's multi-step administrative remedies process (BP-9, BP-10, BP-11) was available and applicable to Reid's claims.
Reid filed several remedies (BP-9s, BP-10s, and BP-11s) but consistently violated procedural requirements (informal resolution, form completeness, timing, and proper sequencing).
The court finds Reid did not complete the required steps for exhaustion, so § 1997e(a) requires dismissal without prejudice.
Consequently, the defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Reid properly exhaust administrative remedies?	Reid pursued multiple remedies and engaged the process.	Reid failed to properly complete each required step and deadlines.	Exhaustion not satisfied; case should be dismissed without prejudice.

Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (U.S. 2006) (strict compliance required for exhaustion)
Dale v. Lappin, 376 F.3d 652 (7th Cir. 2004) (proper timing and procedure required)
Pozo v. McCaughtry, 286 F.3d 1022 (7th Cir. 2002) (place and time rule for administrative remedies)
Smith v. Zachary, 255 F.3d 446 (7th Cir. 2001) (purpose of exhaustion to allow internal responses)
Ford v. Johnson, 362 F.3d 395 (7th Cir. 2004) (dismissals under § 1997e(a) should be without prejudice)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (S. Ct. 1986) (material facts must be genuinely disputed to survive summary judgment)
National Soffit & Escutcheons, Inc. v. Superior Systems, Inc., 98 F.3d 262 (7th Cir. 1996) (substantive law dictates which facts are material)