We affirm Supreme Court's dismissal of the petition on the ground that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to his claim that he was improperly denied access to his books and magazines while confined to the special housing unit. We reach this result on the basis of the court's conclusion that petitioner failed to properly pursue the appropriate grievance procedures (see, 7 N.Y.CRR part 701; Matter of Harris v. Coughlin, 157 A.D.2d 997; Matter of Shahid v Coughlin, 83 A.D.2d 8, affd 56 N.Y.2d 987). In addition, insofar as petitioner has not shown that the issue was predetermined, he has failed to show that pursuit of his administrative remedies would be futile (see, Matter of Symmonds v. Leonardo, 138 A.D.2d 810). To the extent that his allegations could be deemed to seek a mandamus to compel, petitioner has not set forth sufficient facts which would entitle him to such extraordinary relief (cf., Klostermann v. Cuomo, 61 N.Y.2d 525).
Weiss, P.J., Yesawich Jr., Crew III, Casey and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.