Tyler Klingensmith v. Internal Parole Off. “Jane” Taylor, Parole Officer

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 22-1821
___________________________
Tyler Klingensmith
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Internal Parole Off. “Jane” Taylor, Parole Officer; Dawn B. Vandiver, Parole
Board Secretary; Dr. Sells, Unit Psychologist, Ouachita River Correctional Unit
(ORCU); Donna Dycus, ORCU, Unit Coordinator; Clayton Deboer, ORCU,
Mental Health Case Manager; Mrs. Hamer, ORCU, Mental Health Supervisor;
Officer R. Bleadsoe, ORCU; Rory Griffin, Director of Health and Correctional
Services; Warden G. Earl, ORCU; Parole Officer West; Jennings, also known as
Jenkins; Mrs. Fuller; Major Christopher, ORCU/ADC; Mrs. Hossman; Lt.
Delaney, ADC Security/ORCU; Assist Warden Ball, ORCU; Dexter Payne, ADC
Director; Mark Jordan, Bentonville PD Detective; Lt. Hunter, ADC
Security/ORCU; Cummings; Mendoza; Whitley
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs
____________
Submitted: January 31, 2023
Filed: February 7, 2023
[Unpublished]
____________

-- 1 of 2 --

Before LOKEN, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Tyler Klingensmith appeals following the district court’s1 grant of defendants’
motions for summary judgment in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in which
Klingensmith alleged violations of his constitutional rights stemming from a period
of confinement within the Arkansas Division of Correction. Having carefully
reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, see De Rossitte v. Correct
Care Solutions, LLC, 22 F.4th 796, 802 (8th Cir. 2022) (de novo review of summary
judgment rulings); Ballard v. Heineman, 548 F.3d 1132, 1136 (8th Cir. 2008) (abuse
of discretion review of rulings related to adequacy of discovery), we conclude that
defendants were entitled to summary judgment upon demonstrating that Klingensmith
failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a),
see Gibson v. Weber, 431 F.3d 339, 341 (8th Cir. 2005), and that Klingensmith failed
to establish a retaliation claim against defendant Clayton Deboer, see De Rossitte, 22
F.4th at 804.
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed for the reasons provided in the district
court’s rulings. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
1The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the
Honorable Mark E. Ford, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of
Arkansas.
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --