Bobby Charlton v. Oregon Department of Correctio

MEMORANDUM

Oregon state prisoner Bobby Shane Charlton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to exhaust administrative remedies his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging an Eighth Amendment claim arising out of allegedly inadequate medical care. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s legal conclusions on exhaustion and for clear error its factual determinations. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

Dismissal of Charlton’s Eighth Amendment claim against defendant Lytle was proper because, even assuming that Charl-ton appealed the 2009 grievance to the first level, Charlton did not properly exhaust his appeal through the final level as required by the prison’s administrative grievance process, and did not show that administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 , 126 S.Ct. 2378 , 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (“[Pjroper exhaustion of administrative remedies ... means using all steps that the agency…