John Barnhouse v. Harold Clark

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOHN E. BARNHOUSE, No. 10-35602 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:09-cv-05527-RBL v. MEMORANDUM * HAROLD CLARK; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 26, 2012 ** Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Former Washington state prisoner John E. Barnhouse appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. * 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). § 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust 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 with prejudice because Barnhouse did not timely exhaust his prison 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). Barnhouse’s remaining contentions, including those that this court rejected in a prior appeal, are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 10-35602