GARDNER v. THREE UNKNOWN OFFICERS OF IMU NORTH OF WSP (2021)

MEMORANDUM **

Washington state prisoner Kier Keand'e Gardner appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an Eighth Amendment violation arising from the denial of meals. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court's summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1168 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Gardner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (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)); see also FTC v. Neovi, Inc., 604 F.3d 1150, 1159 (9th Cir. 2010) ( “[A court] need not find a genuine issue of fact if, in its determination, the particular declaration was uncorroborated and self-serving.”).

Gardner's opposed motion for oral argument (Docket Entry No. 16) and motion to supplement the record (Docket Entry No. 20) are denied.

AFFIRMED.