Hendon v. Baroya
This text of 320 F. App'x 717 (Hendon v. Baroya) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Carlos Hendon, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust available administrative remedies, and review for clear error its findings of fact. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Hendon failed to submit any evidence demonstrating that he properly exhausted prison grievance procedures. See id. at 1119-20 (explaining that failure to exhaust administrative remedies is subject to an unenumerated Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b) motion, and the court may look beyond the pleadings and decide disputed issues of fact).
Hendon’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
320 F. App'x 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hendon-v-baroya-ca9-2009.