Saddozai v. Davis

Background

Shikeb Saddozai, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against employees at San Quentin State Prison. He alleged that on August 14, 2018, four inmates attacked him while he waited for his cell door to open after the evening meal. He alleged that Defendant Clawson fired a weapon and shot him in the lower back toward his buttocks without a verbal warning, rather than hitting the four inmates, and that Clawson failed to protect him.

Saddozai also asserted claims against Warden Ron Davis, the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and unnamed individuals. The additional allegations involved supervisory responsibility, medical treatment, transfer to disciplinary housing without due process, and denial of First Amendment rights.

The court had twice dismissed earlier versions of the complaint with permission to amend so that Saddozai could comply with rules governing the joining of claims and defendants. It previously determined that the allegations stated a legally recognizable Eighth Amendment failure-to-protect claim against Clawson. The third amended complaint was the operative complaint.

Initial Screening

The court screened the third amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires screening of a prisoner’s complaint against a governmental entity or officer. It concluded that the allegations against Davis and the Director did not show their personal involvement in, or a sufficient causal connection to, Clawson’s alleged failure to protect Saddozai. The court also found no adequate allegations supporting supervisory liability based on training, supervision, control, acquiescence, or reckless or callous indifference.

The court dismissed the claims against Davis and the Director without leave to amend. It also dismissed the unrelated claims against unnamed defendants without leave to amend because those claims were not properly joined with the failure-to-protect claim. The court stated that Saddozai had already received several opportunities to amend and that further amendment would be futile, create undue delay, or both.

Exhaustion Motion

Clawson moved to dismiss the remaining Eighth Amendment claim because Saddozai had not completed the prison’s administrative grievance process before filing suit. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a prisoner must properly exhaust available administrative remedies before bringing a lawsuit about prison conditions. The court explained that completing the grievance process after filing suit does not satisfy that requirement.

Saddozai filed this action on September 11, 2018. The court found that his administrative exhaustion was completed on November 6, 2018, when the second level of review issued its decision. Because the failure-to-protect claim against Clawson appeared in the original complaint, the court rejected the argument that a later exhaustion date could be used under an exception for newly added claims.

Saddozai argued that prison officials had obstructed the grievance process. The court reviewed the submitted grievance documents and found that officials returned or screened out earlier submissions because Saddozai had exceeded the permitted number of appeals during a 14-day period and because the issue was obscured. The court found that officials gave him opportunities to correct the problems and that he ultimately proceeded after complying with the grievance procedures. It therefore concluded that the administrative remedies were available and that Saddozai had not shown that officials made them unavailable.

Disposition

The court granted Clawson’s motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. It dismissed all claims against Clawson, in both his individual and official capacities, without prejudice. Separately, based on initial screening, it dismissed without leave to amend the claims against Warden Ron Davis and the Director and the unrelated claims against unnamed defendants. The Clerk was directed to terminate those defendants and close the file.