Rick A. Young v. James C. Spaulding James Blodgett

983 F.2d 1080 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Rick A. YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James C. SPAULDING; James Blodgett, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-35268. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 6, 1993. * Decided Jan. 14, 1993. Before REINHARDT, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Rick Young, a Washington State prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. The district court dismissed Young's action because it did not present a ripe claim for review. We review de novo, Southern Pac. Transp. Co. v. Los Angeles, 922 F.2d 498 , 502 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 382 (1991), and affirm. 3 In his complaint, Young alleges that the defendants' refusal to retain urine samples which test positive in the future as part of their drug testing program violated his rights under the eighth and fourteenth amendments. Young seeks money…