Arthuro Q. Bermudez v. Edward T. Duenas, Chief Parole Officer, Guam Parole Services Division

Arthuro Q. Bermudez, a prisoner incarcerated under the laws of Guam, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against members of the Guam Territorial Parole Board (“Board”), his social worker at the prison, and other prison officials in their individual and official capacities. Bermudez contends that the district court erred in dismissing this action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. We review de novo. Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 110 S.Ct. 3217 , 110 L.Ed.2d 664 (1990). We affirm the dismissal of all of the plaintiff’s claims except his claim that his denial of parole was a denial of due process. As to this claim, the district court erred in holding that the plaintiff lacked any protected liberty interest under the Guam parole statutes. See Board of Pardons v. Allen, 482 U.S. 369 , 107 S.Ct. 2415 , 96 L.Ed.2d 303 (1987); Greenholtz v. Inmates of Neb. Penal and Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1 , 99 S.Ct. 2100 , 60 L.Ed.2d 668 (1979).

I

Bermudez’s contention that the district court erred in dismissing the defendants named in their official…