Yellen

MEMORANDUM **

Michael S. Yellen, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging numerous constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo both the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim and grant of summary judgment, see Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815-16 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and affirm.

With respect to Yellen’s retaliation claims, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants because Yellen failed to establish a genuine issue as to the link between his exercise of constitutional rights and the allegedly retaliatory action. See Pratt v. Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806-07 (9th Cir. 1995).

With respect to Yellen’s claim concerning interest earned on his inmate trust account, we conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment because Yellen failed to provide evidence that he had exhausted state remedies. See Macri v. King County, 126 F.3d 1125, 1128-29 (9th Cir.1997).

With respect to Yellen’s contention that the district court erred by denying his motion for an extension…