Opinion
No. 18-56078
06-18-2019
MAURICE WASHINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. AYON, Correctional Officer, sued in their individual capacity; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 2:16-cv-09113-JVS-MRW MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Maurice Washington, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Eighth Amendment claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1168 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Washington failed to exhaust administrative remedies, and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires "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)" (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858-60 (2016) (setting forth circumstances when administrative remedies are unavailable).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Washington's request for appointment of counsel, set forth in the opening brief, is denied.
AFFIRMED.