Steve Mahoney v. Pierce County Jail

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT STEVE ALAN MAHONEY, No. 11-35321 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:10-cv-05238-BHS v. MEMORANDUM * PIERCE COUNTY JAIL; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 26, 2012 ** Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Steve Alan Mahoney appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his health while he was a pretrial detainee at the Pierce County Jail. We have * 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). jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), and for clear error its factual determinations. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed the action because Mahoney did not timely exhaust his administrative grievance remedies. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95 (2006) (exhaustion is mandatory and must be done in a timely manner consistent with prison policies). Mahoney’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. Appellee’s motion to strike portions of Mahoney’s opening brief and appendix is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 11-35321