NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 19 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRAIG KAISER GARRETT, No. 17-56598
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00784-AB-KES
v.
MEMORANDUM*
J. GASTELO; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
André Birotte, Jr., District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 11, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Craig Kaiser Garrett, 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 deliberate indifference to a serious medical
needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
*
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).
Jackson v. Fong, 870 F.3d 928, 932 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Garrett failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he properly exhausted
administrative remedies for his claim that Finander falsified a medical report, or
whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Ross v.
Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858-60 (2016) (describing limited circumstances under
which administrative remedies are deemed unavailable); Griffin v. Arpaio, 557
F.3d 1117, 1120-21 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[A] grievance suffices if it alerts the prison to
the nature of the wrong for which redress is sought.”).
Garrett does not challenge the district court’s dismissal of his remaining
deliberate indifference claims in his opening brief and has therefore waived any
challenge to the district court’s dismissal of those claims. See Paladin Assocs.,
Inc. v. Mont. Power Co., 328 F.3d 1145, 1164 (9th Cir. 2003).
AFFIRMED.
2 17-56598