NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 23 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GREGORY C. BONTEMPS, No. 15-17176
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:12-cv-02185-TLN-AC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
NEVES; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 14, 2017**
Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Gregory C. Bontemps, 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 excessive force and retaliation. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo,
*
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).
775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Bontemps
failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he exhausted his
administrative remedies as required under the Prison Litigation Reform Act
(“PLRA”), or whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable. See
Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858-60 (2016) (exhaustion not required when
administrative remedy is unavailable); Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006)
(“[P]roper exhaustion of administrative remedies . . . means using all steps that the
agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on
the merits).” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
Bontemps’s request for appointment of counsel, attached to the opening
brief, is denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 15-17176