Cortez

MEMORANDUM

Robert Lee Jenkins, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Cook v. Brewer, 649 F.3d 915, 917 (9th Cir.2011) (per curiam), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the retaliation claims because the complaint failed to allege facts sufficient to show that Cortez was involved in any actions that were motivated by retaliation. See Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir.1989) (no respondeat superior liability under § 1983; a plaintiff must show the defendant’s personal involvement in alleged violations); Rhodes v. Robinson, 408 F.3d 559, 567-68 (9th Cir.2005) (prisoner must demonstrate that the purported adverse action did not reasonably advance a legitimate correctional goal).

The district court properly dismissed the due process claim because Jenkins failed to allege facts sufficient to show that a protected liberty interest was at stake. See Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1078 (9th Cir.2003) (due process protections “adhere only when the disciplinary action…