NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 20 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SIR GIORGIO SANFORD CLARDY, No. 20-36056

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:15-cv-01241-CL

v.

MEMORANDUM*

JONES; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 12, 2021**

Before: TALLMAN, RAWLINSON, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

Oregon state prisoner Sir Giorgio Sanford Clardy 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 equal protection claims.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v.

* 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). Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Clardy failed

to exhaust administrative remedies and he failed to raise a genuine dispute of

material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to

him. See Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1856, 1858-60 (2016) (setting forth

circumstances when administrative remedies are effectively unavailable);

Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (proper exhaustion requires “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)).

Clardy’s motion to correct the current status of the case (Docket Entry No.

18) is denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 20-36056