MEMORANDUM **

Julian R. Hood, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his employment action against the United States Postal Service. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed as untimely Hood’s action because Hood failed to initiate contact with the Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) Counselor within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory incident. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1) (“An aggrieved person must initiate contact with a Counselor within 45 days of the date of the matter alleged to be discriminatory!;.]”); see also Lyons v. England, 307 F.3d 1092, 1105 (9th Cir. 2002) (failure to comply with this 45 day requirement is “fatal to a federal employee’s discrimination claim”).

We do not consider any claims that Hood did not raise before the district court. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 988, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Hood’s opposed “Motion Requesting Court to Take Judicial Notice of Additional *575 Medical Exhibits” (Docket Entry No. 3) is denied.

Hood’s request for reimbursement of costs, set forth in his opening brief, is denied.

AFFIRMED.