Manuel Gonzalez, III v. T. Mason

357 F. App'x 835
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 4, 2009
Docket08-16440
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 357 F. App'x 835 (Manuel Gonzalez, III v. T. Mason) 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
Manuel Gonzalez, III v. T. Mason, 357 F. App'x 835 (9th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Manuel Antonio Gonzalez III, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We affirm.

DISCUSSION

The Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), requires that a prisoner exhaust available administrative remedies *836 before bringing a federal action concerning prison conditions. Griffin v. Arpaio, 557 F.3d 1117, 1119 (9th Cir.2009). The exhaustion must be “proper,” meaning that all steps the prison requires must be satisfied. Id.

We agree with the district court that Gonzalez failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Moreover, the district court did not clearly err in finding that Gonzalez was not prevented from filing prison grievances. See Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1119-20 (9th Cir.2003) (“In deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust nonjudicial remedies, the court may ... decide disputed issues of fact.”). Finally, there is no merit to Gonzalez’s contention that he exhausted his claims because prison officials otherwise had “notice” of his complaints. See Marella v. Terhune, 568 F.3d 1024, 1027 (9th Cir.2009) (noting prisoners must “complete the administrative review process in accordance with the applicable procedural rules”) (quoting Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 88, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006)).

AFFIRMED. 1

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Gonzales submitted documents on appeal that were not part of the record below. Ap-pellees’ motion to strike those documents from the record on appeal is granted.

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

Related

Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Olfati v. City of Sacramento
E.D. California, 2023

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
357 F. App'x 835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manuel-gonzalez-iii-v-t-mason-ca9-2009.