Court Opinion

ID: 625155
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-03-12 22:08:46+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:51:10.186658
License: Public Domain

FILED
                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            MAR 12 2012

                                                                        MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

                             FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY ADDUCCI,                                 No. 11-15310

               Plaintiff - Appellant,            D.C. No. 1:07-cv-00762-AWI-
                                                 SMS
  v.

KELLY HARRINGTON, Warden; et al.,                MEMORANDUM *

               Defendants - Appellees.

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Eastern District of California
                     Anthony W. Ishii, Chief Judge, Presiding

                              Submitted March 6, 2012 **

Before:        B. FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

       Anthony Adducci, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C.

          *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
          **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
§ 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the

district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust, and for clear error its factual

determinations. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003). We

affirm.

       The district court properly dismissed the action without prejudice because

Adducci failed to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing suit. See

Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” is

mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules).

       Adducci’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

       AFFIRMED.

                                             2                                       11-15310