Whittenberg v. Bortolamedi
This text of 56 F. App'x 365 (Whittenberg v. Bortolamedi) 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 James Whitten-berg appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, which alleged that prison officials subjected Whittenberg to discrimination, harassment and retaliation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm because Whittenberg conceded in his complaint that he had failed to completely exhaust his administrative remedies. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198,1199 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (con-[366]*366eluding administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing suit).
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
56 F. App'x 365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whittenberg-v-bortolamedi-ca9-2003.