Craig Wimberly v. Kathleen Alician ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 1 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRAIG WIMBERLY, No. 21-15720
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:19-cv-08316-SI
v.
MEMORANDUM*
KATHLEEN ALICIAN, Director of the
Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation; RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of
CDCR; RON DAVIS, Warden of San
Quentin State Prison; A. CUEVAS, Sgt at
SQSP - Visting Room,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 17, 2022**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Craig Wimberly appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42
*
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).
U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir.
2015). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendant Cuevas
because Wimberly failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by the
Prison Litigation Reform Act, and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact
as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See
Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3084.2(a) (2019); Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 218
(2007) (the level of detail necessary in a grievance to comply with the grievance
procedures is “defined not by the PLRA, but by the prison grievance process
itself”); see also Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. 632, 642-44 (2016) (setting forth
circumstances when administrative remedies are effectively unavailable).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-15720