Marcus Moore v. R. Schlichting

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 26, 202221-16229California370 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 26 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARCUS J. MOORE, No. 21-16229

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:20-cv-01672-DAD-EPG

v.

R. SCHLICHTING, C/O at Sierra MEMORANDUM*

Conservation Center,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 17, 2022**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Marcus J. Moore appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging sexual assault,

sexual harassment, and violation of his right to due process by prison officials. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.