Terrance Irby v. Steve Sinclair
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Terrance Jon Irby, a Washington state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging numerous constitutional violations in connection with disciplinary sanctions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and § 1915(e), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Trimble v. City of Santa Rosa, 49 F.3d 583, 584 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam). We affirm.
Dismissal of the Eighth Amendment claims, including those that arose after Irby commenced the action on May 13, 2010, was proper because Irby failed to allege that defendants knowingly and unreasonably disregarded an objectively intolerable risk of harm by denying his requests to be placed in a single cell. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 846 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994).
The district court properly dismissed all of the due process claims relating to Irby’s confinement in administrative segregation because, absent an allegation of atypical and…