PAUL A. REDD, Jr. v. Michael D. Daley

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PAUL A. REDD, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MICHAEL D. DALEY,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 09-17164
D.C. No. 5:98-cv-20429-JF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2010
San Francisco, California
Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Paul Redd, Jr. (“Redd”), a prisoner currently in the custody of the California
Department of Corrections (“CDC”), appeals the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983
claim against CDC Correctional Officer Michael Daley for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies, as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) of the Prison
FILED
DEC 20 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We reverse and remand for further proceedings. We review de novo the district
court’s determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr., 502 F.3d 1056, 1059 (9th Cir. 2007).
The district court dismissed Redd’s excessive force claim for failure to
exhaust because Redd did not assert in his prison grievance that Daley used
excessive force. However, where prison grievance rules do not set forth a level of
factual specificity – as is the case here – this court has held that a prisoner must
simply notify the prison of the “nature of the wrong for which redress is sought.”
Griffin v. Arpaio, 557 F.3d 1117, 1120 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Strong v. David,
297 F.3d 646, 650 (7th Cir. 2002)). Here, Redd’s grievance addresses the incident
with Daley and strongly suggests that Daley’s actions were intentional. The
grievance does not explicitly set forth the elements of the claim, but it sufficiently
informs the prison of the nature of the wrong. Thus, Redd has exhausted his
administrative remedies with respect to the excessive force claim.
We remand for consideration of the excessive force claim.
REVERSED and REMANDED.

-- 2 of 2 --