William J. Becker v. Julie Jones, 3:14-cv-00104

Background

Plaintiff William Becker, a Hindu-Krishna Consciousness inmate at Lawtey Correctional Institution, alleges FDOC staff confiscated his prayer shawl, tulasi bead necklace, and krsna pendant on August 28, 2012, and refused to return them.
Becker alleges he sought return through chaplain Wright and property sergeant Nieves; Wright relied on a Religion Technical Guide and denied the items; Becker alleges emotional distress and inability to pray properly.
Becker filed an informal grievance (September 2013), a formal grievance (October 1, 2013), and an appeal (November 2013); the appeal was returned without action on December 4, 2013 for procedural noncompliance, and Becker did not file a timely formal grievance after an Assistant Warden response.
Defendants (Jones, Reddish, Nieves, Wright) moved to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and alternatively on immunity and merits grounds; Becker opposed, arguing he exhausted and that some defenses are for trial.
The court applied PLRA exhaustion rules and Florida’s three-step grievance procedure, found Becker’s initial informal grievance untimely and that he failed to utilize the renewed opportunity given by the Assistant Warden, and concluded administrative remedies were not exhausted.
Order: Defendants’ motion granted; complaint dismissed without prejudice; case closed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Becker exhausted administrative remedies under the PLRA and FDOC rules	Becker contends he filed informal (Sept 2013), formal (Oct 1, 2013), and appeal (Nov 2013) grievances and the process was effectively unavailable due to delays/ignoring	Defendants argue Becker’s informal grievance was filed nearly a year late, procedural timeframes not followed, appeal returned for noncompliance, and he failed to complete the required steps	Court held Becker failed to properly exhaust: initial informal grievance untimely and he did not use the Assistant Warden’s opportunity to timely file a formal grievance; dismissal without prejudice granted
Whether alleged delays/returned appeal rendered grievance process unavailable under Ross v. Blake exceptions	Becker asserted delays/ignoring made remedies unavailable and noted delayed receipt of appeal response	Defendants maintained responses occurred and process remained available; the Assistant Warden’s response provided a renewed chance to exhaust	Court rejected unavailability argument: process was not a dead end or opaque; Becker had opportunities and did not show machination or intimidation
Whether Eleventh Amendment or statutory immunities bar certain claims (official-capacity damages, RLUIPA damages, FRFRA)	Becker asked court to reserve immunity disputes for trial and suggested diversity/jurisdictional arguments for state claims	Defendants argued official-capacity §1983 claims and FRFRA claims barred by Eleventh Amendment; RLUIPA does not permit money damages against officials	Court did not reach merits/immunity because it dismissed for failure to exhaust (claims dismissed without prejudice)
Whether plaintiffs stated individual-capacity §1983 claims (physical injury requirement) and whether injunctive relief defendants redundant	Becker argued merits and sought injunctive relief against multiple defendants, contending chaplain and warden roles differed	Defendants argued monetary claims fail (no physical injury), injunctive relief should be limited to Secretary (Jones) as policymaker	Court did not resolve merits or redundancy issues because dismissal for nonexhaustion was dispositive

Key Cases Cited

Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (PLRA requires "proper exhaustion" complying with procedural rules)
Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (failure to exhaust is an affirmative defense; prisoners need not plead exhaustion)
Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850 (three situations when administrative remedies are unavailable)
Turner v. Burnside, 541 F.3d 1077 (Eleventh Circuit two-step framework for resolving exhaustion disputes on motion to dismiss)
Dimanche v. Brown, 783 F.3d 1204 (timeliness requirements in FL DOC grievance process and proper exhaustion standard)
Whatley v. Warden, Ware State Prison, 802 F.3d 1205 (affirming Turner two-step; courts accept prisoner’s factual view at first step)