The following excerpt is from McCoy v. Tate, CASE NO. 1:15-cv-01428-MJS (PC) (E.D. Cal. 2017):
The exhaustion requirement is based on the important policy concern that prison officials should have "an opportunity to resolve disputes concerning the exercise of their responsibilities before being haled into court." Jones, 549 U.S. at 204. The "exhaustion requirement does not allow a prisoner to file a complaint addressing non-exhausted claims." Rhodes v. Robinson, 621 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 2010); McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) ("a prisoner does not comply with [the
Page 4
exhaustion] requirement by exhausting available remedies during the course of the litigation").
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.