Jaime Zepeda v. W. Sullivan

MEMORANDUM

Jaime Ledesma Zepeda, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of access to the courts and unconstitutional conditions of confinement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and a determination that a prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108 , 1117 (9th Cir.2003). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Lambert v. Blodgett, 393 F.3d 943, 965 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Zepeda’s outdoor exercise and winter clothing claims because these claims were based on conduct that occurred prior to the filing of the initial complaint and Zepe-da failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before presenting them to the district court. See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (requiring dismissal without prejudice where a prisoner “did not exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing suit”). We reject Zepeda’s…