NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EARNEST S. HARRIS, No. 18-15422

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-01487-JST

v.

MEMORANDUM*

E. McCUMSEY, Ms.; Senior Librarian, The Law Library, Pelican Bay State Prison,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 19, 2019**

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Earnest S. Harris appeals pro se from the district

court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-to-

courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.

Brodheim v. Cry, 584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court properly granted summary judgment because Harris failed

to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he suffered an actual injury

as a result of defendant’s conduct. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 353-54

(1996) (setting forth elements of access-to-courts claim and actual injury

requirement).

We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See

Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2