Whether a properly filed/submitted inmate grievance was effectively unavailable due to prison officials' failure to respond within procedural time constraints

ESTION PRESENTED { Whether a by signed feceipt FORM 2a}progerly Filed /submitted 2 60a gtievance deposited in an (inmate Appeals OFFicé) designated Secure 602 Appeals Mail Box depository Sight. Subsequenty, Prison OFFicial s 3 |Fail/refuse +0 respond +o +hat initial appeal within an agency's time 4 |eonstraint’s procedural rules Bee does the Prison Litigation Reform Act CPLRA) have a BAKED into its TEXTian exception w PLRA will g [not require exhaustion ubea cinder aforemention Circumstances” euit! reneler administrative existing rémeares “CF fectively Unavailable”, 6 PARTIES . TI The Petitioner is Terry Dillingham, a prisoner currently at keraVvalle ¥ a (State Prison Facility "C"in Oelana, CA. The Regondents are Eva Scruggs, , 9 iT: Beunschery Salinas Vailey State Prison Correcticna) Cooks , RMojica Salinas Valley State Prison Correctional Lieutenant Appeal s Coordinator 2 (orlet the +imecs? of the sncidentes), " TABLE® OF CocUTEMTS 1a |Puestien Presented 13 forties Table OF Authorifies (4 |pecisions Below — 18 [Warisidichon Constitutonnl and Statutory Provisions Involved — 16 [étotement OF The Case rq Bases for Federal Turisidiction Reason for Granting the Wit — 18 A, Conflict with Decisions of other Courts 13 B. Importance Dr the Puestion Presented ——_. ; 20 Apoendix ; . O€céSion OF The United States Court of Appeals du HOrder oF The United States Court of Appeals Denying Re hearing ——_ . 2g, |Order 0F the United States Drstiict Court ; a3 : . a4 as ab Py e * , ee : _ Def 8 i ool '