Jeffrey Anthony Woodfork v. AREF FAKHOURY, Warden;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JEFFREY ANTHONY WOODFORK,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
AREF FAKHOURY, Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-55358
D.C. No. 2:09-cv-06849-JVS-
AGR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 13, 2012**
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Jeffrey Anthony Woodfork appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation
FILED
NOV 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-55358 2
Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust. Sapp v.
Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 821 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Woodfork conceded
that he did not exhaust administrative remedies and failed to show that those
remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81,
85, 93-95 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” is mandatory and requires
adherence to administrative procedural rules); Sapp, 623 F.3d at 822 (exhaustion is
not required where administrative remedies are “effectively unavailable”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --