Lonnie Burton v. Pat Glebe
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Washington state prisoner Lonnie L. Burton appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1082 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Burton failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants deprived him of due process by confining him in administrative segregation for less than two months. See Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S. 460 , 476-77 & n. 9, 103 S.Ct. 864 , 74 L.Ed.2d 675 (1988), abrogated in part on other grounds by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (due process requires (1) an informal, nonadversary evidentiary review sufficient both for the decision that an inmate represents a security threat and the decision to confine an inmate to administrative segregation pending completion of an investigation into misconduct charges against him, (2) some notice of the charges against him and an opportunity to present his views, and (3) periodic review of the confinement).