Richardson v. Quintana, 112912 FED9, 11-55902
|Party Name:||BRYAN KEITH RICHARDSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FRANCISCO QUINTANA, Warden; et al., Defendants-Appellees.|
|Judge Panel:||Before: CANBY, TROTT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||November 29, 2012|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted November 13, 2012 [**]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California No. 5:11-cv-00420-UA-AGR, George H. King, Chief Judge, Presiding
Federal prisoner Bryan Keith Richardson appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion to proceed in forma pauperis in his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Names Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, O'Loughlin v. Doe, 920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Richardson's motion to proceed in forma pauperis because the complaint shows that the action is without merit. See id. at 616-17; see also Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 475-76, 486 (1995) (prisoner has no due process right to present witnesses at prison disciplinary proceeding where no atypical hardship imposed).
Richardson's contention that the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP