MEMORANDUM ***

California state prisoner Kimiko Ran-some appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing sua sponte her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir. 2003). We vacate and remand.

Dismissal before defendant’s appearance in the case was improper because Ran-some alleged in her complaint that she had completed the prison grievance process and exhausted her available administrative-remedies prior to filing suit. See Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 214-16, 127 S.Ct. 910, 166 L.Ed.2d 798 (2007) (exhaustion is an affirmative defense and sua sponte dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the PLRA is only appropriate if, taking the prisoner’s factual allegations as true, the complaint establishes her failure to exhaust).

VACATED and REMANDED.