Inmate Guy Clayton Barnes appeals from the order of the District Court 1 dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Upon de novo review, we conclude that dismissal without prejudice was warranted. See Hammett v. Cofield, 681 F.3d 945, 946 (8th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (standard of review). It is clear from the record that Barnes’s grievance appeal was not decided on the merits but was denied because it was untimely. Cf. id. at 947 (adopting the position “that the PLRA’s exhaustion requirement is satisfied if prison officials decide a procedurally flawed grievance on the merits”). And while inmates cannot be held to exhaustion requirements when prison officials keep them from pursuing their administrative remedies, see Miller v. Norris, 247 F.3d 736, 740 (8th Cir. 2001), Barnes fell short of showing that such remedies were made unavailable to him. We affirm the District Court, and we deny Barnes’s pending motions for default judgment.