Michael Scott Ioane, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Thomas v. Sottile, Defendant-appellee, 125 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 1997)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Michael Scott Ioane appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his action alleging constitutional violations against Thomas V. Sottile, a United States Postal Inspector who prosecuted Ioane for illegal use of the mails to further a fraudulent work at home scheme. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion the district court's decision concerning the exhaustion of administrative remedies, see Girard v. Klopfenstein, 930 F.2d 738, 740 (9th Cir. 1991), and we affirm.

It is undisputed that Ioane failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Ioane contends, however, that exhaustion of his administrative remedies would be futile because the United States Postal Service ("Postal Service") is biased. This contention lacks merit because Ioane failed to allege facts showing that the Postal Service was biased other than alleging that the Postal Service, through Sottile, prosecuted him and the administrative law judge ruled against him. See Joint Bd. of Control of the Flathead, Mission and Jocko Irrigation Dists. v. United States, 862 F.2d 195, 200 (9th Cir. 1988) ("Objective and undisputed evidence of administrative bias would render pursuit of an administrative remedy futile."); United States v. Litton Indus., 462 F.2d 14, 18 (9th Cir. 1972) (administrative review not futile because plaintiff's allegations of bias purely speculative).

AFFIRMED.¹