United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division
December 19, 2014
CHRISTOPHER E. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff,
BENJAMIN LOVERIDGE, Defendant.
ENTRY DIRECTING DEVELOPMENT OF EXHAUSTION DEFENSE AND ISSUING PARTIAL STAY
Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge United States District Court
The Court, having considered the above action and the matters which are pending, makes the following rulings:
The defendant has asserted the affirmative defense that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this lawsuit. This defense must be resolved before reaching the merits of this case. Pavey v. Conley, 544 F.3d 739, 742 (7th Cir. 2008); Perez v. Wis. Dep't of Corr., 182 F.3d 532, 536 (7th Cir. 1999) (“The statute [requiring administrative exhaustion] can function properly only if the judge resolves disputes about its application before turning to any other issue in the suit.”). Accordingly, the defendant shall have through January 30, 2015, in which to either 1) file a dispositive motion in support of the affirmative defense that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this lawsuit, 2) notify the Court that this affirmative defense is not amenable to resolution through a dispositive motion, or 3) notify the Court that the defendants will not pursue the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust. If a dispositive motion is filed, the plaintiff shall have twenty-eight (28) days in which to respond. The defendant shall then have fourteen (14) days in which to reply.
Except for activities associated with the development and resolution of the defendant’s affirmative defense that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this action, or any other matter directed by the Court, any other activities or deadlines in the action are stayed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.