Travis Thompson v. Kathleen Allison ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TRAVIS RAY THOMPSON, No. 21-15812
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:21-cv-00001-AWI-JLT
v.
KATHLEEN ALLISON, Secretary of MEMORANDUM*
CDCR; CONNIE GIPSON, Warden,
Director of the Div. of Adult Inst.;
IGBINOZA, Chief Medical Officer;
CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER, Warden, Warden,
Kern Valley State Prison,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 17, 2022**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Travis Ray Thompson appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to exhaust administrative remedies
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his Eighth Amendment rights.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo legal rulings on
exhaustion. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Thompson’s action because Thompson
was required to exhaust administrative remedies, but alleged in the complaint that
he did not. See Albino, 747 F.3d at 1169 (where a failure to exhaust is clear from
the face of the complaint, a district court may dismiss for failure to state a claim);
see also Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. 632, 643-44 (2016) (articulating the limited
circumstances in which administrative remedies are not “available” and therefore
need not be exhausted).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-15812