United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Eastern Division
Keith Ball UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Joel Graham, a state prisoner, brought this action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Graham alleges a myriad of
constitutional violations during his pre-trial confinement at
the Jones County Adult Detention Center
(“JCADC”). Before the Court are four motions:
Defendants' motion for summary judgment ,
Graham's motion for summary judgment , and two motions
to strike, one by Defendants  and one by Graham .
makes a variety of claims against Defendants and JCADC staff.
The vast majority of Graham's claims fail, however,
because he did not exhaust available administrative remedies
prior to filing suit. Of the three claims he potentially
exhausted, each fails to allege actions by Defendants which
would amount to a constitutional violation. Accordingly,
Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all claims.
contends that his conditions of confinement while
incarcerated at JCADC were unconstitutional. In support of
his claim, he cites the jail's assignment of multiple
inmates to a cell, his sleeping on a mat on the floor,
cell lights being on for twenty-four hours per day, and
cigarette and tobacco usage by the guards.  at 2-3; 
at 2-3;  at 11-14. He alleges that the other inmates and
the guards were too loud, that he was not given enough food,
and that prison officials opened his legal mail.  at 1-2;
 at 2-3. Graham claims that Defendants Hare, Hodge, and
Johnson failed to respond to his complaints regarding his
cell assignments and the overcrowding.  at 7, 14,
also makes the following allegations relating to specific
incidents which he contends occurred while he was
incarcerated at JCADC:
(1) Defendants Howard and Eubanks used excessive force
against him by tasing him, macing him, placing him in a
restraint chair, and slamming his head against the back of
the chair. [16-2] at 1;  at 9, 14-15;  at 4.
(2) Defendant Howard failed to protect him from harm by
forcing him to stay in a cell with an inmate who eventually
assaulted him.  at 9-10;  at 4.
(3) Defendants James, Gainey, Wilkinson, Grayson, and Howard
took pictures of his legal documents during a cell search.
 at 1;  at 19-20.
(4) Defendants punished him worse than other inmates after
they found two shanks in his cell during a search, and that
the punishment amounted to an equal protection violation.
 at 1-2;  at 24-25.
(5) Defendant Eubanks placed him in a holding cell without a
mattress, blanket, or proper toilet (the cell contained a
grated drain pipe for use as a toilet) for twelve hours. 
at 1-2;  at 2;  at 29.
(6) Officers retaliated against him for filing this suit by
denying him access to razors, shaving cream, toothpaste, and
by “screaming and hollering” at him.  at 2-3;
 at 19.
(7) Defendant Brown, on September 13, 2015, used a knife and
“stab[bed Graham] in the face between [his]
eyes.”  at 23;  at 3. He claims that as a
result he bled, developed a scab, and has a “little
small pink scar” that “you can't really see .
. . unless you're standing right up on [him].” 
made additional claims against two former defendants, Pamela
Adkins and Carroll Johnston. However, the Court previously
dismissed those claims. See Omnibus Order .
The majority of Graham's claims must be dismissed for
failure to exhaust available administrative
U.S.C. § 1997(e) requires that an inmate bringing a
civil rights action in federal court first exhaust available
administrative remedies. Whitley v. Hunt, 158 F.3d
882 (5th Cir. 1998). This exhaustion requirement applies to
all inmate suits about prison life. Porter v.
Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (2002). The requirement that claims
be exhausted prior to the ...