Cotton v. Looney ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                                                           F I L E D
    United States Court of Appeals
    Tenth Circuit
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    December 14, 2005
    TENTH CIRCUIT
    Clerk of Court
    GERALD G. COTTON,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,                      No. 05-2254
    v.                                             (D. of N.M.)
    RICK LOONEY, Warden, LINDA                     (D.C. No. CIV 05-183 JB/LCS)
    LYON, Unit Manager, A.
    JARAMILLO, Sergeant, S. COOK,
    Case Manager, CORRAL, Unit
    Manager, and S. BACA, Case
    Manager,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
    Before KELLY, O’BRIEN, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges. **
    Plaintiff-Appellant Gerald G. Cotton, a state prisoner appearing pro se,
    filed a civil rights complaint in the district court pursuant to 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
    ,
    *
    This order is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of
    the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the
    citation of orders; nevertheless, an order may be cited under the terms and
    conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
    **
    After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge
    panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material
    assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th
    Cir. R. 34.1(G). The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
    alleging he was repeatedly denied access to the prison law library. The district
    court, in an order entered July 28, 2005, denied Mr. Cotton’s claim for failure to
    meet the requirements of 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). According to the district court,
    Cotton failed to exhaust fully his administrative remedies, as required by the
    Prison Litigation Reform Act. See Ross v. County of Bernalillo, 
    365 F.3d 1181
    ,
    1190 (10th Cir. 2004) (“[T]he PLRA . . . requires inmates to exhaust fully all of
    their claims before filing in federal court.”). The court therefore dismissed the
    complaint without prejudice.
    We agree. For the reasons set forth by the district court, we DISMISS the
    appeal. We further remind Mr. Cotton that he remains obligated to continue
    making monthly payments to pay the appellate filing fee.
    Entered for the court
    Timothy M. Tymkovich
    Circuit Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-1486

Judges: Kelly, O'Brien, Tymkovich

Filed Date: 12/14/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024