Russell v. Ofogh

111 F. App'x 682
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 21, 2004·No. No. 04-6625·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Everett T. Russell appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. “No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions ... by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (2000). We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s dismissal of the complaint without prejudice to allow Russell an opportunity to exhaust his administrative remedies, as required by § 1997e(a). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Russell v. Ofogh, 111 F. App'x 682 (4th Cir. 2004).

111 F. App'x 682 (Russell v. Ofogh) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Odom v. United States
544 U.S. 910 (Supreme Court, 2005)