Timothy Crayton v. RANDY GROUNDS, Warden, Warden, Retired; W. L. MUNIZ, Warden, Successor

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TIMOTHY CRAYTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
RANDY GROUNDS, Warden, Warden,
Retired; W. L. MUNIZ, Warden, Successor,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-15637
D.C. No. 5:15-cv-03900-BLF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 12, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Timothy Crayton, 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 Eighth Amendment claims. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Furnace v. Sullivan, 705 F.3d 1021,
* 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
SEP 19 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-15637
1026 (9th Cir. 2013). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Crayton
failed to exhaust administrative remedies or raise a genuine dispute of material fact
as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See
Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (the Prison Litigation Reform Act
requires “proper exhaustion,” which means “using all steps that the agency holds
out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)”
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Griffin v. Arpaio, 557 F.3d 1117,
1120 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[A] grievance [only] suffices if it alerts the prison to the
nature of the wrong for which redress is sought” (citation and internal quotation
marks omitted)).
We reject as unsupported by the record Crayton’s contentions that
defendants should be sanctioned for misconduct regarding discovery.
Crayton’s motion to supplement the record (Docket Entry No. 13) is granted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --