
    Ronald Anthony HICKS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. S. BONACCORSO; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 01-17530.
    D.C. No. CV-98-1575-DFL.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Jan. 8, 2004.
    Ronald Anthony Hicks, pro se, Chino, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Michael J. Williams, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, Gregory Scott Walston, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ronald Anthony Hicks, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and affirm.

Hicks’s contention that he was not required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to bringing a section 1983 action seeking only monetary relief is foreclosed by Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 741, 121 S.Ct. 1819, 149 L.Ed.2d 958 (2001).

Hicks’s motion for monetary judgment is denied.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     