Opinion
No. 14-17168
04-20-2016
EFREN VALENCIA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DEAZEVEDO, Defendant - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 1:10-cv-01348-LJO-SAB MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O'Neill, District Judge, Presiding Before: FARRIS, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Efren Valencia, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations in connection with his conditions of confinement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court's grant of summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Valencia's claims regarding his living conditions because Valencia failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he properly exhausted his administrative remedies, or whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 84, 90 (2006) (requiring proper exhaustion, which means "using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)" (emphasis, citation, and quotation marks omitted)); Sapp v. Kimbrell, 623 F.3d 813, 822-24, 826-27 (9th Cir. 2010) (describing limited circumstances under which administrative remedies might be effectively unavailable or otherwise excused).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by granting summary judgment without allowing Valencia to conduct discovery because Valencia failed to show what material facts would have been discovered that would have precluded summary judgment. See Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 412-13 (9th Cir. 1988) (setting forth standard of review and recognizing that "[t]he burden is on the nonmoving party . . . to show what material facts would be discovered that would preclude summary judgment").
Valencia's motion for appointment of counsel, filed on April 20, 2015, is denied.
AFFIRMED.