FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 04 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CESAR ENCISO, No. 15-15956
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:12-cv-00924-LJO-SKO
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ALCATAR; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Cesar Enciso 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 deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Williams v.
*
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).
Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015), and we affirm.
The district court properly concluded that Enciso failed to exhaust his
administrative remedies because the grievance he filed at the Substance Abuse
Treatment Facility did not sufficiently alert prison officials to the nature of the
wrong underlying his deliberate indifference claims against defendants at North
Kern State Prison and Corcoran State Prison. See Reyes v. Smith, 810 F.3d 654,
659 (9th Cir. 2016) (a grievance only suffices “if it alerts the prison to the nature of
the wrong for which redress is sought” (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
Enciso’s contentions regarding the timeliness of his grievance and tolling are
without merit.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-15956