Jeffrey Rodd v. K. Crandall ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 21-3110
    ___________________________
    Jeffrey Charles Rodd
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
    v.
    K. Crandall, HS Asst.; Dr. Benjamin Rice; PA Ashley Peterson; C. Nickrenz;
    Captain J. Feda; United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of Minnesota
    ____________
    Submitted: February 9, 2022
    Filed: February 14, 2022
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Former federal inmate Jeffrey Rodd brought this action under Bivens v. Six
    Unknown Named Agents, 
    403 U.S. 388
     (1971), and the Federal Torts Claims Act
    against prison staff, alleging that they were deliberately indifferent to injuries he
    suffered when he fell out of his wheelchair in November 2014.
    The district court1 granted summary judgment dismissing Rodd’s Bivens claims
    for failure to exhaust available administrative remedies, as he did not attempt to file
    formal grievances. See Johnson v. Jones, 
    340 F.3d 624
    , 627 (8th Cir. 2003). His
    alleged blindness did not excuse failure to exhaust because Bureau of Prisons
    regulations provide for assistance in obtaining administrative remedies, and Rodd did
    not allege that prison officials prevented him from seeking assistance. See 
    28 C.F.R. § 542.16
    (a). The court dismissed Rodd’s Federal Tort Claims Act claims because this
    action was not filed within six months after the Bureau of Prisons denied the claim,
    see 
    28 U.S.C. § 2401
    (b); and Rodd was not entitled to equitable tolling because he
    failed to establish that anything prevented him from timely filing suit, see Pace v.
    DiGuglielmo, 
    544 U.S. 408
    , 418 (2005).
    After careful review of the record, we agree with the district court’s analysis.
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Eric C. Tostrud, United States District Judge for the District
    of Minnesota.
    -2-