NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FELIPE DIAZ, No. 20-55571 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:18-cv-01982-FMO-JDE v. * T. LINDQUIST, Law Library Coordinator at MEMORANDUM SCP-SAC A-Yard; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Fernando M. Olguin, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 17, 2022** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Felipe Diaz appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force and other constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo legal rulings on

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). exhaustion. Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1171 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Diaz 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 Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. 632, 643-44 (2016) (describing limited circumstances in which administrative remedies are unavailable); Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (concluding exhaustion under the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires complying “with an agency’s deadlines and other critical procedural rules”).”

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 20-55571