Thomas Randall Hargrove; Michael Steven Novak v. Washington State Department of Corrections;

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes these cases are suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
THOMAS RANDALL HARGROVE;
MICHAEL STEVEN NOVAK,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Nos. 11-35470
11-35518
D.C. No. 2:10-cv-00363-RBL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 13, 2012 **
Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Washington state prisoners Thomas Randall
Hargrove and Michael Steven Novak appeal pro se from the district court’s
FILED
NOV 27 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-35470 2
judgment dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First Amendment
violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the
district court’s dismissal for failure to exhaust. O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr.,
502 F.3d 1056, 1059 (9th Cir. 2007). We may affirm on any ground supported by
the record, id., and we affirm.
Dismissal for failure to exhaust was proper because plaintiffs failed to
demonstrate that they fully exhausted administrative remedies prior to filing suit.
See McKinney v. Carey, 311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1200 (9th Cir. 2002) (per curiam)
(requiring dismissal without prejudice when there is no pre-suit exhaustion).
Plaintiffs’ contention that the district court failed to conduct a de novo
review is unavailing.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --