Frank J. Matylinsky v. Janet Wolder Harold G. Albright Edward J. Hill

977 F.2d 590 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Frank J. MATYLINSKY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Janet WOLDER; Harold G. Albright; Edward J. Hill, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-16815. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 22, 1992. * Decided Oct. 1, 1992. Before GOODWIN, D.W. NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Matylinsky, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se from a summary judgment entered by the district court on his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . He contends that the district court erred by finding that his claim was time-barred. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. 3 Matylinsky charges Wolder, Albright, and Hill of conspiring to deprive him of his property without due process of law. In December 1983, Matylinsky was arrested and subsequently convicted of murdering his pregnant…