Case Name: Perry Robert AVILA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.B. WILLIAMS; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-12-10
Citations: 258 F. App'x 941
Docket Number: No. 05-17020
Parties: Perry Robert AVILA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. J.B. WILLIAMS; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 258
Pages: 941–942

Head Matter:
Perry Robert AVILA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. J.B. WILLIAMS; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-17020.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 3, 2007.
Filed Dec. 10, 2007.
Perry Robert Avila, Tehachapi, CA, pro se.
Michael W. Jorgenson, Esq., Office of the California Attorney General, Oakland, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Perry Robert Avila, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging prison officials violated his First Amendment rights by preventing him from receiving magazines and books containing nudity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003), and we vacate and remand, in light of intervening authority.
The district court dismissed the entire action after concluding Avila failed to exhaust some claims before filing. We vacate the order and remand for reconsideration in light of Jones v. Bock, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 910, 923-26, 166 L.Ed.2d 798 (2007) (holding an inmate's!compliance with PLRA exhaustion requirement as to some, but not all, claims does not warrant dismissal of entire action).
We deny all pending motions.
The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.