Johnny Warren v. Clarence Dupnik

MEMORANDUM

Arizona state prisoner Johnny Lee Warren appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations while in county detention. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir.2003) (summary judgment); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Warren’s First Amendment claim regarding the 28-day period while Warren awaited approval for a pork-free diet because Warren failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the verification requirements were not reasonably related to legitimate penological interests and unduly burdened Warren’s ability to exercise his religion. See Resnick v. Adams, 348 F.3d 763, 768-71 (9th Cir.2003) (requiring an application to provide a religious diet does not unduly burden a prisoner’s right to practice his religion); Ward v. Walsh, 1 F.3d 873, 877 (9th Cir.1993)…