SKINNER v. PFISTER (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Roderick Skinner, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a deliberate indifference claim arising out of events that occurred while he was detained at Washoe County Jail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We vacate and remand.

The district court concluded that Skinner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. It is undisputed that Skinner did not file a grievance related to his present claims. However, it is unclear from the record when Skinner was aggrieved sufficiently to trigger the grievance deadline, and even if he was aggrieved, whether Skinner was able to initiate the grievance process due to his illness and subsequent hospitalization. See Marella v. Terhune, 568 F.3d 1024, 1027 (9th Cir. 2009) (remanding for the district court to consider whether prisoner-plaintiff was able to initiate the grievance process while receiving medical treatment and during administrative lockdown). We vacate and remand for the district court to consider whether administrative remedies were unavailable to Skinner.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.