David Losoya v. Warden Woodford

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner David Losoya appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging violations of his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir.2003). We review de novo the district court’s dismissal based on failure to exhaust, and for clear error its factual findings. O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr., 502 F.3d 1056, 1059 (9th Cir.2007). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, id., and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of defendants on Losoya’s due process claim because he failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendants are retaining him in the Security Housing Unit with insufficient evidence and denying him periodic reviews. See Bruce, 351 F.3d at 1287-88 (prison gang validation proceeding subject to the “some evidence” standard).

The district court properly dismissed Losoya’s four remaining claims to the extent that they are based on events after February 2001 because he failed to properly exhaust the prison…