Luis M. Garces v. Degadeo;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
LUIS M. GARCES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
DEGADEO; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-15602
D.C. No. 1:06-cv-01038-JAT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 17, 2012**
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Luis M. Garces 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.
FILED
JUL 26 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-15602 2
§ 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the
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). We
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Garces’s excessive force claim because
he failed to exhaust administrative remedies. 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).
Garces’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --