Eddie James Williams v. Edward Silvas Jeffrey Hood

46 F.3d 1149 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Eddie James WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Edward SILVAS; Jeffrey Hood, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-15698. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted: Jan. 25, 1995. * Decided: Feb. 3, 1995. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HALL and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arizona state prisoner Eddie James Williams appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for defendant prison officials in Williams's 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir. 1994), and we affirm. 3 Williams contends that defendants violated his right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment by raising his institutional risk score and transferring him to another prison. This contention lacks merit. 4 To state a claim under section 1983, Williams must show that the defendants acted under color of law and…