FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 20 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ELISANDRO MENDOZA, No. 12-15993
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:09-cv-00717-LRH-
VPC
v.
STEFANIE HUMPHREY, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2013**
Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Elisandro Mendoza appeals pro se from the district
court’s order denying his motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 60(b) following the dismissal of Mendoza’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983
*
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).
action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J,
Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We
affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Mendoza’s motion
for relief from judgment because Mendoza failed to establish grounds for relief
under Rule 60(b). See id. at 1263 (discussing grounds for relief from judgment
under Rule 60(b)); see also McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir.
2002) (per curiam) (holding that the district court must dismiss the complaint,
rather than staying proceedings, where a prisoner has not exhausted administrative
remedies prior to filing suit).
AFFIRMED.
2 12-15993