Raymond Gonzalez v. GARY PENROD, San Bernardino County Sheriff, individual

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RAYMOND GONZALEZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GARY PENROD, San Bernardino County
Sheriff, individual and official capacity
and SCHNEIDER, San Bernardino County
Deputy Sheriff, individual,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-55647
D.C. No. 5:07-cv-01463-DOC-
MLG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 22, 2010**
Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Raymond Gonzalez
(“Gonzalez”) failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. See
FILED
OCT 04 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-55647 2
Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90, 95 (2006) (“proper exhaustion” under 42
U.S.C. § 1997e(a) is mandatory and requires adherence to administrative
procedural rules).
We decline to consider arguments presented for the first time on appeal.
Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999).
Gonzalez’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --