Albert J. Hamilton v. Wasco State Prison;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALBERT J. HAMILTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
WASCO STATE PRISON; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-16770
D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00661-AWI-SAB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Albert J. Hamilton, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo,
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
AUG 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-16770
775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Hamilton did
not properly exhaust his administrative remedies or raise a genuine dispute of
material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to
him. See Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858-60 (2016) (describing the limited
circumstances under which administrative remedies are deemed unavailable);
Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (“[P]roper exhaustion of administrative
remedies . . . means using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so property
(so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).” (citation, internal
quotation marks, and emphasis omitted)).
All pending requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --