James Amadeo v. Mark Castellaw

Good Law
371 F. App'x 763
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 201009-15022California705 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Prisoner James Michael Vincent Ama-deo appeals pro se the district court’s partial dismissal of his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and its subsequent grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants. He also appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to strike the defendants’ declaration in support of their motion for summary judgment.

We review de novo the district court’s partial dismissal of Amadeo’s complaint and the district court’s grant of summary judgment. See Mayfield v. United States, 588 F.3d 1252, 1258 (9th Cir.2009) (summary judgment standard); Weilburg v. Shapiro, 488 F.3d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir.2007) (28 U.S.C. § 1915A dismissal standard). We review the district court’s decision regarding a motion to strike for abuse of discretion. JG v. Douglas County Sch. Dist., 552 F.3d 786 , 803 n. 14 (9th Cir.2008). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

The facts of this case are known to the parties. We do not repeat them.

I

The district court properly partially dismissed Amadeo’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. None of the constitutional provisions Amadeo invokes applies to his situation. See Breed v. Jones, 421 U.S. 519, 528 ,…

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.