Cox

MEMORANDUM **

Ernest L. Cox, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to protect him from assault by other inmates. The district court dismissed the action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s application of the substantive law governing exhaustion of administrative remedies, and we review for clear error its factual findings. Ritza v. Int’l Longshoremen’s & Warehousemen’s Union, 837 F.2d 365, 369 (9th Cir.1988) (per curiam). We vacate and remand.

The record shows that, before he was assaulted, Cox corresponded with defendant Harris and spoke to defendant Trexler about threats to his safety, and that after the assault he spoke and corresponded with E.C. Donnelly of the California Department of Corrections about transferring to another institution. These letters and conversations were not sufficient to satisfy the exhaustion requirement because Cox neither presented the Eighth Amendment claims asserted in his section 1983 complaint nor pursued…