MEMORANDUM **

Phillip J. Rosenblum, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust, and for clear error its factual determinations. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Rosenblum’s action because he failed to exhaust administrative remedies or demonstrate that he was excused from doing so. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 85, 93-95, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” is mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules).

Rosenblum’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.