Cyprian v. Givens, 100413 FED9, 12-17214
|Party Name:||LAWRENCE CYPRIAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DERRICK GIVENS; et al., Defendants-Appellees.|
|Judge Panel:||Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||October 04, 2013|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted September 24, 2013 [**]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 2:09-cv-02704-JAM-JFM
California state prisoner Lawrence Cyprian appeals pro se from the district court's judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims related to allegedly false disciplinary charges against him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004) (summary judgment); Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1077 n.5 (9th Cir. 2003) (dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6)); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Cyprian's claims against defendant Newman because Cyprian failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Newman, a private attorney who successfully defended Cyprian in a felony criminal trial, acted under color of state law. See Simmons v. Sacramento Cnty. Superior Court, 318 F.3d 1156, 1161 (9th Cir. 2003) (lawyer in private practice is not a state actor under § 1983, and conclusory allegations that the lawyer was conspiring with state officers are insufficient to establish liability).
The district court properly dismissed Cyprian's access-to-courts claim because Cyprian failed to allege that being denied access to the law library prejudiced his ability to file a nonfrivolous legal claim. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-53 (1996) (denial of access to courts requires actual injury).
The district court properly dismissed Cyprian's deliberate indifference claim because Cyprian failed to allege that defendants knew of and disregarded a serious risk to his health from hay fever-like symptoms caused by lack of outside airflow. See Toguchi, 391 F.3d at 1057 (elements of deliberate indifference).
The district court properly dismissed Cyprian's due process claim because Cyprian failed to allege facts showing that he was denied notice of the disciplinary charge and evidence against...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP