George Hamilton v. R. Hernandez
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellant George Hamilton appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to state a claim. Hamilton’s claims relate to his practice of the House of Yahweh religion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
Hamilton challenges the district court’s dismissal of his claims alleging violations of his rights under the First and Eighth Amendments and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUI-PA). Hamilton’s amended complaint asserts that Salinas Valley State Prison officials violated his rights by placing him with an incompatible cell mate, interfering with his religious practice, and retaliating against him. Even when the amended complaint is liberally construed, see Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir.2012), we conclude that Hamilton’s amended complaint did not allege facts sufficient to support a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988) (“To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged…