Andante Lamont-Goldsby v. Amanda Kaschmitter; Joanne McPheeters; J. Rambo; Does, 1-10

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANDANTE LAMONT-GOLDSBY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
AMANDA KASCHMITTER; JOANNE
MCPHEETERS; J. RAMBO; DOES, 1-10,
Defendants-Appellees
No. 16-35537
D.C. No.
1:14-cv-00032-REB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
Ronald E. Bush, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted February 9, 2018
Seattle, Washington
Before: M. SMITH and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and GORDON, ** District
Judge.
Andante Lamont-Goldsby, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals from the district
court’s grant of summary judgment against him in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
alleging constitutional violations by prison officials. Our review is de novo, see
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The Honorable Andrew P. Gordon, United States District Judge for
the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.
FILED
FEB 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1168 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc), and we may affirm
on any ground supported by the record, see Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d
1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291,
and we affirm.
Lamont-Goldsby failed to exhaust available administrative remedies as
required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Although the alleged acts which form the basis
for Lamont-Goldsby’s claims occurred between January 2013 and June 22, 2013,
he did not file a grievance until November 6, 2013, long after the thirty-day period
had expired. Lamont-Goldsby has shown a genuine issue of material fact as to the
availability of the grievance process between June 22 and September 16, 2013,
when he was housed in segregation at the North Idaho Correctional Institution and
then moved to the Kootenai County jail. See Ross v. Blake, 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858–
59 (2016). However, he does not dispute that the grievance process was available
between September 16 and October 29, 2013, when he was housed at the
Reception Diagnostic Unit. Cf. Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1225–26 (9th
Cir. 2010) (excusing failure to exhaust administrative remedies when they were
rendered effectively unavailable and prisoner “promptly” filed a grievance when it
became possible). Lamont-Goldsby’s lack of access to a law library during this
period may have prevented him from researching his legal claims, but it did not
prevent him from grieving the allegedly unconstitutional acts upon which his

-- 2 of 3 --

3
claims are based.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --