Richard McKenzie v. Maureen Rossi-Hill
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Oregon state prisoner Richard L. McKenzie appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgments in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging access-to-courts, due process, and retaliation claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to compel discovery, Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on McKenzie’s access-to-courts claim because McKenzie failed to identify any actual injury he suffered as a result of prison officials’ actions. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 351-55 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (aceess-to-courts claim requires plaintiff to show that defendants’ conduct caused actual injury to a non-frivolous legal claim concerning his conviction or conditions of confinement).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on McKenzie’s due process claim concerning prison disciplinary proceedings because McKenzie received all of the process that was due, and some evidence supported the…