Jeffrey Williams v. A Santa Cruz
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Jeffrey Allen Williams, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging denial of the right to practice his religion in violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a), Barlow v. Ground, 39 F.3d 231, 233 (9th Cir.1994), 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Williams’s claims against defendant Santa Cruz in his individual capacity after the state filed and served notice of Santa Cruz’s death and no party filed a valid motion to substitute his successor. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(a)(1). Contrary to Williams’s contention, the district court was not required to substitute a successor for claims against Santa Cruz in his individual, rather than official, capacity. Cf. Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(d)(1)…