Anderson

Anderson v. Runge

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 202523-1535California395 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 21 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAMES P. ANDERSON, No. 23-1535 D.C. No. 3:21-cv-00922-TLT Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

KEVIN RUNGE; L. RICHARDSON; D.

ARVIZO,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Trina L. Thompson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 17, 2025**

Before: CANBY, R. NELSON, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner James P. Anderson appeals pro se from the district

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation and

due process violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). de novo. Nunez v. Duncan, 591 F.3d 1217, 1222 (9th Cir. 2010). We…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.