Reginald Howard v. Howard Skolnik

MEMORANDUM

Nevada state prisoner Reginald Clarence Howard appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging, among other claims, violations of his right to freely exercise his religious beliefs under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUI-PA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Shakur v. Schriro, 514 F.3d 878, 883 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment as to Howard’s RLUIPA claim for damages because such a claim may proceed only for injunctive relief against defendants acting within their official capacities. See Wood v. Yordy, 753 F.3d 899, 904 (9th Cir.2014) (RLUIPA does not contemplate liability of government employees in individual capacity); see also Holley v. Cal. Dep’t of Corr., 599 F.3d 1108, 1114 (9th Cir.2010) (“The Eleventh Amendment bars [the plaintiffs] suit for official-capacity damages under RLUI-PA.”).

The district court properly concluded that to the extent Howard sought injunc-tive relief under the First Amendment and RLUIPA, his claims were moot because…