USCA11 Case: 20-11683 Date Filed: 06/24/2021 Page: 1 of 5
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 20-11683
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:20-cv-00139-WFJ-PRL
KENYA JAROD FRANKLIN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
MARION COUNTY JAIL,
OCALA COMMUNITY CARE INC.,
Medical Provider,
V. VELEZ-DIAZ,
M.L.S.,
T. WOOTEN,
P.T.P.,
BILLY WOODS,
High Sheriff of Marion County Sheriff's Office,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(June 24, 2021)
USCA11 Case: 20-11683 Date Filed: 06/24/2021 Page: 2 of 5
Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiff Kenya Franklin, a Florida prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the
district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil complaint
for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prisoner Litigation Reform
Act (“PLRA”). Because the district court erred in sua sponte dismissing the
complaint, we vacate the court’s ruling and remand for further proceedings.
FACTS
Plaintiff filed suit claiming that prison medical staff violated his Eighth
Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment when they were
deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. In making this claim,
Plaintiff utilized the district court’s Civil Rights Complaint Form, which requires
the prisoner-complainant to answer questions concerning his place of confinement,
previous lawsuits, the parties involved, the legal claim asserted, the factual basis
for the claim, the relief requested, and, of pertinence here, “exhaustion of
administrative remedies.” The latter question indicates the need to exhaust
remedies before filing a civil action concerning jail conditions and states that the
claim could be dismissed if the administrative grievance process was not
completed.
Plaintiff left that question blank. The district court reviewed the complaint
2
USCA11 Case: 20-11683 Date Filed: 06/24/2021 Page: 3 of 5
form, and, apparently noticing the lack of a response to this question, sua sponte
dismissed the complaint without prejudice, indicating that Plaintiff had failed to set
forth what steps he had taken to exhaust his remedies in this complaint.
Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration before the district court, stating
that “Everything in my civil complaint has been addressed at institutional level
from 8-23-19 to this very date and time, and over a year before (Oct. 2018 to 7-3-
19).” Plaintiff attached several documents to this motion, including several
medical request forms and a complaint made to the Sheriff. Unfortunately,
however, on the same date he filed the motion for reconsideration, Plaintiff filed a
notice of appeal from the district court’s order dismissing his complaint. For that
reason, the district court denied Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, noting that
the court lacked jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff’s motion while the present appeal
was pending.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, Plaintiff asserts that the district court erred in dismissing his
complaint. While Plaintiff’s pro se appellate brief lacks clarity, Plaintiff refers to
the steps he took to obtain medical care, asserts that the defendants withheld
documents memorializing Plaintiff’s efforts, and states that he had “sought for
months . . . to get proper treatment, proper medications and documents from
defendants.” Accordingly, we construe the brief as arguing that the district court
3
USCA11 Case: 20-11683 Date Filed: 06/24/2021 Page: 4 of 5
erred in dismissing his complaint based on his presumed failure to exhaust
remedies. In reviewing a district court’s dismissal of a § 1983 action for failure to
exhaust available administrative remedies, we review de novo the court’s
interpretation and application of the exhaustion requirement. Johnson v. Meadows,
418 F.3d 1152, 1155 (11th Cir. 2005).
Under § 1915A, a court must review, before docketing, a prisoner’s civil
complaint and dismiss the complaint if it “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a)–(b). Under
§ 1997e(a), “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under
[§ 1983], or any other Federal law, 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). However, “failure to exhaust is an affirmative
defense” and “inmates are not required to specially plead or demonstrate
exhaustion in their complaints.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 216 (2007). “A
complaint may be dismissed if an affirmative defense, such as failure to exhaust,
appears on the face of the complaint,” but “[o]therwise, exhaustion and other
affirmative defenses must be raised in a responsive pleading.” Bingham v.
Thomas, 654 F.3d 1171, 1175 (11th Cir. 2011).
4
USCA11 Case: 20-11683 Date Filed: 06/24/2021 Page: 5 of 5
Here, the face of the complaint did not demonstrate that Plaintiff had failed
to exhaust his claims. The district court therefore erred in sua sponte dismissing
Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of exhaustion. Accordingly, we vacate the district
court’s dismissal and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
5