administrative resolution of the complaint is still pending, see Jernigan v. Stuchell, 304 F.3d 1030, 1032 (10th Cir.2002) (an inmate who starts but fails to complete the grievance process is “barred from pursuing a § 1983 claim under the PLRA for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies”), a prisoner cannot be required to wait indefinitely for a response to his final grievance before he may seek judicial review. That is, when prison officials fail to timely re spond to a grievance, the prisoner has exhausted “available” administrative remedies under the PLRA. See id. (“[T]he failure to respond to a grievance within the time limits contained in the grievance policy renders an administrative remedy unavailable .... ”); see also Sergent v. Norris, 330 F.3d 1084, 1085 (8th Cir.2003) (<HOLDING>). Because the CDOC did not timely respond to
holding that a prisoner exhausted his administrative remedies even though his grievance was untimely holding that a plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies when his claim is deemed denied because of failure of administrator to respond in a timely manner recognizing that officials failure timely to respond to grievance could be basis for prisoner to show he exhausted available administrative remedies holding remedies not available to prisoner where officials failed to respond to his grievance during time period required by regulations holding prisoner who successfully appealed grievance had exhausted available administrative remedies even though he did not appeal the nonimplementation of the recommendation to the corc