MEMORANDUM **
Oregon state prisoner Tony French appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his First and Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and for clear error any underlying factual findings. Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1117 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed French’s action without prejudice because French did not properly exhaust his administrative remedies before filing suit. See Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81, 93-95, 126 S.Ct. 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (holding that “proper exhaustion” is mandatory and requires adherence to administrative procedural rules). French’s argument on appeal that his grievances and related papers were “mysteriously” lost is unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.