Joseph Signorelli v. Frank Hughes

MEMORANDUM

Joseph L. Signorelli, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment on his claim that county jail officers violated his rights under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and also appeals from the order denying of his motions for appointment of counsel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo summary judgment. Carmen v. San Francisco Unified Sch. Dist., 237 F.3d 1026 , 1029 (9th Cir.2001). We review for an abuse of discretion denial of a motion for appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 . Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1991). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Signorelli failed to identify any evidence in the record that established that he was disabled as defined by the ADA. See Carmen, 237 F.3d at 1028-31 (affirming summary judgment even though there was evidence in the record that may have created a triable issue, but where that evidence was not explicitly referenced in the opposition to the motion); Weinreich v. L.A. County Metro. Transp. Auth., 114 F.3d 976, 978 (9th Cir.1997) (explaining that to state a claim of…