Case ID: f-appx_516/html/0653-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bryan DENNIE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brian E. WILLIAMS; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 12-15764.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2013.
    
    Filed April 22, 2013.
    Bryan Dennie, Indian Springs, NV, pro se.
    Clark G. Leslie, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, AGNV-Offiee of the Nevada Attorney General, Carson City, NV, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Bryan Dennie appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants denied him adequate ventilation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and for clear error the district court’s underlying factual determinations. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108,1117 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Dennie’s action because Dennie did not exhaust prison grievance procedures concerning his claim and failed to show that exhaustion was effectively unavailable. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (exhaustion is mandatory and must be done in a timely manner consistent with prison policies); Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1224 (9th Cir.2010) (excusing prisoner’s failure to exhaust where prisoner is prevented from doing so).

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