JESSE LEE SHAVERS, Jr. v. D. Clark;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JESSE LEE SHAVERS, Jr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
D. CLARK; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-15596
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-01001-JAM-
CKD
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2013**
Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Jesse Lee Shavers, Jr., appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
retaliation and failure to protect. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
FILED
MAR 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

We review de novo a dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Shavers’s action because Shavers
failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing suit. 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); McKinney v. Carey,
311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (requiring exhaustion of
administrative remedies prior to filing suit).
AFFIRMED.
12-15596 2

-- 2 of 2 --