Arthur Bussiere v. Cano ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                             NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                         FILED
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT                          MAR 17 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    ARTHUR T. BUSSIERE,                              No. 13-15719
    Plaintiff - Appellant,            D.C. No. 1:10-cv-00945-AWI-
    DLB
    v.
    CANO, Correctional Counselor II; et al.,         MEMORANDUM*
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of California
    Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted March 10, 2014**
    Before:        PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    California state prisoner Arthur T. Bussiere appeals pro se from the district
    court’s judgment dismissing his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     action alleging constitutional
    violations arising from assaults on him by other inmates. We have jurisdiction
    under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to exhaust
    *
    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).
    administrative remedies, and for clear error the district court’s factual findings.
    Morton v. Hall, 
    599 F.3d 942
    , 945 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
    The district court properly dismissed Bussiere’s claim against defendant
    Lopez because Bussiere failed to exhaust administrative remedies or demonstrate
    that administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Woodford v.
    Ngo, 
    548 U.S. 81
    , 85, 93-95 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” is mandatory
    and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules); Morton, 
    599 F.3d at 946
     (explaining that “a grievance suffices if it alerts the prison to the nature of the
    wrong for which redress is sought,” and concluding that inmate grievance that did
    not refer to an assault was insufficient to put prison officials on notice of prisoner’s
    complaint about an assault) (citation and quotation marks omitted); cf. Sapp v.
    Kimbrell, 
    623 F.3d 813
    , 822-23 (9th Cir. 2010) (exhaustion is not required where
    administrative remedies are rendered “effectively unavailable”).
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     13-15719
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-15719

Judges: Pregerson, Leayy, Murguia

Filed Date: 3/17/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024