Leonard Manning v. Dora Schriro

Good Law
356 F. App'x 950
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 14, 200909-15047California510 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Arizona state prisoner Leonard L. Manning appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing, without prejudice, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional violations against prison officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and for abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Manning’s due process claim concerning his disciplinary proceedings because he did not sufficiently allege a resulting deprivation of a protected liberty interest. See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995) (limiting substantive due process protection to conduct that amounts to an “atypical and significant hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life”).

The district court properly dismissed Manning’s equal protection claim because he failed to allege facts showing that defendants acted with an intent or purpose to discriminate against him based…

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.