Kenner v. W.I.N.G.S. Supervisor

Ninth Circuit

Kenner v. W.I.N.G.S. Supervisor

331 F. App'x 483

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 26, 2009

DocketNo. 07-16439

StatusPublished

This text of 331 F. App'x 483 (Kenner v. W.I.N.G.S. Supervisor) 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.

Bluebook

Kenner v. W.I.N.G.S. Supervisor, 331 F. App'x 483 (9th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

James Jefferson Kenner, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s application of substantive law de novo and its factual determinations for clear error, Wyatt v. Terhune, [484]*484315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because Kenner did not complete the prison grievance process prior to filing suit. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” under § 1997e(a) is mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules); see also Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 734, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001) (holding that an inmate seeking only money damages must complete any prison administrative process capable of addressing his complaint and providing some form of relief, even if the process does not provide for the recovery of monetary relief).

Kenner’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM

**

James Jefferson Kenner, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s application of substantive law de novo and its factual determinations for clear error, Wyatt v. Terhune, [484]*484315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because Kenner did not complete the prison grievance process prior to filing suit. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” under § 1997e(a) is mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules); see also Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 734, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001) (holding that an inmate seeking only money damages must complete any prison administrative process capable of addressing his complaint and providing some form of relief, even if the process does not provide for the recovery of monetary relief).

Kenner’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

331 F. App'x 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenner-v-wings-supervisor-ca9-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack