Zander v. LappinZander v. Lappin
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Angelo Ham appeals the district court‘s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ham v. Chandler, No. 6:10-cv-02020-JMC, 2010 WL 4638156 (D.S.C. Nov. 8, 2010). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Vacated and remanded by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Alex Zander appeals the district court‘s order dismissing without prejudice his civil action filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Zander argues on appeal, as he did below, that the actions of prison officials rendered those remedies “unavailable” to him.
“[A]n administrative remedy is not considered to have been available if a prisoner, through no fault of his own, was prevented from availing himself of it.” Moore v. Bennette, 517 F.3d 717, 725 (4th Cir. 2008). Thus, “when prison officials pre-
In this case, the district court did not address Zander‘s allegations that prison officials hindered his ability to exhaust his administrative remedies. We therefore vacate the district court‘s order granting summary judgment to Defendants and remand for a determination of whether the grievance procedure was “available” to Zander within the meaning of
VACATED AND REMANDED.