context: The district court properly dismissed the action because Davis clearly conceded that he failed to exhaust prison grievance procedures prior to filing suit.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies regardless of the type of relief sought
citation_a.sentence: See Wyatt, 315 F.3d at 1120 (“A prisoner’s [clear] concession to nonexhaustion is a valid ground for dismissal .... ”); see also Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001) (requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies regardless of the type of relief sought); McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies pri- or to filing suit).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 315 F.3d 1120, 1120
citation_b.parenthetical: "A prisoner's [clear] concession to nonexhaustion is a valid ground for dismissal .... "
citation_b.sentence: See Wyatt, 315 F.3d at 1120 (“A prisoner’s [clear] concession to nonexhaustion is a valid ground for dismissal .... ”); see also Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001) (requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies regardless of the type of relief sought); McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies pri- or to filing suit).