SIR GIORGIO CLARDY V. JONES, No. 20-36056 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED OCT 20 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SIR GIORGIO SANFORD CLARDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 20-36056 D.C. No. 2:15-cv-01241-CL MEMORANDUM* JONES; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, Chief District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 12, 2021** Before: TALLMAN, RAWLINSON, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges. Oregon state prisoner Sir Giorgio Sanford Clardy 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 equal protection claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Williams v. * 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). Paramo, 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment because Clardy failed to exhaust administrative remedies and he failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1856, 1858-60 (2016) (setting forth circumstances when administrative remedies are effectively unavailable); Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (proper exhaustion requires “using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits)” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Clardy’s motion to correct the current status of the case (Docket Entry No. 18) is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 20-36056

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.