Nathan Spencer v. Morris;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
NATHAN SPENCER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MORRIS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-55583
D.C. No. 3:08-CV-00416-JM-JMA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Jeffrey T. Miller, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010**
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Nathan Spencer, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C.
§ 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the
FILED
JUL 22 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-55583 2
district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust, and for clear error its factual
determinations, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003), and we
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Spencer failed to
exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548
U.S. 81, 93-95 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” under section 1997e(a) is
mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules); see also
McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (inmates are
required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit in federal court).
Spencer’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --