*1 Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Vasilis Fotiou Sakellaridis appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation in violation of the First Amendment. We have *2 jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Andres v. Marshall , 867 F.3d 1076, 1077 (9th Cir. 2017), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Sakellaridis did not exhaust his administrative remedies, and he failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable to him. See Williams v. Paramo , 775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015) (setting forth the burden-shifting framework for exhaustion); see also Ross v. Blake , 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1858-60 (2016) (setting forth circumstances when administrative remedies are unavailable).

AFFIRMED.

2 17-16009

[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).