Loomis v. Rentie

62 F.3d 1424 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Michael J. LOOMIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James J. RENTIE, James Crosby, Kathy Lillybridge, James Barker, c/o Krone, Arvon Arave, c/o Aikman, Randy Blades, Alfonso Munoz, CPL. Bennett, and George Dolak, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-35820. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 23, 1995. * Decided July 31, 1995. Before: SNEED, SKOPIL, and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Michael J. Loomis, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action. Loomis alleges that prison officials (1) violated the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by terminating his visitation rights for several years, (2) retaliated against him for pursuing his legal rights, and (3) deprived him of due process in connection with a disciplinary hearing. Loomis also appeals the district…