You're viewing Docket Item 16 from the case Jones v. Holmes et al. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case: 11-16556 07/12/2012 ID: 8247243 DktEntry: 13-1 Page: 1 of 2
Case 3:11-cv-00047-LRH-WGC Document 16 Filed 07/12/12 Page 1 of 2

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JUL 12 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

JASON M. JONES,

No. 11-16556

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-00047-LRH-
RAM

DOROTHY NASH HOLMES, Prosecutor;
et al.,

MEMORANDUM*

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 26, 2012**

Before:

SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

Nevada state prisoner Jason M. Jones appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to

Jones’s safety and health. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Case: 11-16556 07/12/2012 ID: 8247243 DktEntry: 13-1 Page: 2 of 2
Case 3:11-cv-00047-LRH-WGC Document 16 Filed 07/12/12 Page 2 of 2

review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28

U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We vacate

and remand.

The district court prematurely dismissed Jones’s action as time-barred. It is

not clear at this stage in proceedings whether the statute of limitations was tolled

while Jones filed any administrative grievances. See Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d

926, 943 (9th Cir. 2005) (“the applicable statute of limitations must be tolled while

a prisoner completes the mandatory exhaustion process”). Nor is it clear what date

Jones filed this action. See Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1104 (2009) (the

mailbox rule of Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988), applies to a pro se

prisoner’s § 1983 complaint).

VACATED and REMANDED.

2

11-16556