Loeb v. Evans
This text of 81 F. App'x 234 (Loeb v. Evans) 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
California state prisoner Desmon Loeb appeals from the judgment dismissing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissal for failure to exhaust, see Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 50, 157 L.Ed.2d 23, 71 U.S.L.W. 3668 (2003), and dismissal for failure to state a claim, see Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000).
It is undisputed that Loeb’s administrative grievances regarding excessive force were filed after he filed his original complaint. Likewise, Loeb’s administrative appeal from related disciplinary proceedings was not resolved until seven months after his complaint was filed. Therefore, Loeb failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and the district court’s dismissal of those claims without prejudice was proper. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d at 1120.
The district court should also have dismissed Loeb’s claims against associate warden Colon for failure to exhaust, rather than reaching the merits. Accordingly, we construe the dismissal of those claims to be without prejudice. Id.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
81 F. App'x 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loeb-v-evans-ca9-2003.