SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(US)(ca4) 111

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Webster Williams III – Appellant
Versus
Michael Carvajal – Respondent



PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6495

WEBSTER DOUGLAS WILLIAMS, III

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

MICHAEL CARVAJAL

Defendant – Appellee.

------------------------------

ARC OF THE UNITED STATES; MENTAL HEALTH AMERICA; NATIONAL DISABILITY RIGHTS NETWORK

Amici Supporting Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge (5:20−ct−03189−FL)

Argued: January 24, 2023 Decided: March 29, 2023

Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and Max O. COGBURN, Jr., United States District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina, sitting by designation.

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Wilkinson wrote the opinion, in which Judge Diaz and Judge Cogburn joined. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6495 Doc: 42 Filed: 03/29/2023 Pg: 2 of 21

ARGUED: Jennifer A. Wedekind, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Holly Paxson Pratesi, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Daniel K. Siegel, Michele Delgado, ACLU OF NORTH CAROLINA LEGAL FOUNDATION, Raleigh, North Carolina; Kaitlin Banner, Jacqueline Kutnik-Bauder, Ashika Verriest, Margaret Hart, WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS & URBAN AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Samuel Weiss, RIGHTS BEHIND BARS, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 22-6495 Doc: 42 Filed: 03/29/2023 Pg: 3 of 21

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge:

Webster Williams, a federal inmate, sued Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) staff

alleging, inter alia, discrimination and retaliation under the Rehabilitation Act. The district

court dismissed the action for failure to exhaust available administrative remedies.

According to the court, the Prison Litigation Reform Act required Williams to exhaust both

the BOP’s Administrative Remedy Program and an additional remedy, particular to prison

discrimination claims, administered by the Department of Justice’s Director of Equal

Employment Opportunity. Williams appeals, arguing that he was only required to exhaust

the BOP’s Administrative Remedy Program under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

Williams asserts in the alternative that the Department of Justice remedies were not

“available” to him. We disagree with both contentions and thus affirm the district court’s

dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust.

I.

A.

On February 28, 2019, Webster Williams was walking to his work assignment at

the Butner Federal Correctional Complex in North Carolina when he developed a strong

urge to urinate. Williams suffers from several medical conditions, including kidney

disease, and takes a diuretic that causes excessive urination. As Williams headed to the

restroom, an alarm was triggered elsewhere in the prison. BOP Unit Manager Willis

responded by heading to the restroom entrance and telling inmates to return to their cells.

Williams proceeded past Willis without addressing him and went into a stall.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top