Garcia

Garcia v. Mueller

Good Law
4 F. App'x 464
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 22, 2001No. 00-15520; D.C. No. CV-98-01789-LKKCalifornia274 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Carlos Thomas Garcia, a California state inmate, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging retaliation, without leave to amend, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) for failure to state a *465 claim. See Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). The district court’s denial of leave to amend is reviewed for abuse of discretion, see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc); and the district court’s decision not to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over related state law claims is reviewed for clear error, see Brady v. Brown, 51 F.3d 810, 816 (9th Cir.1995). We affirm.

We conclude that the district court properly dismissed Garcia’s complaint, which alleged that he was denied a hardship transfer in retaliation for filing grievances, because the prison officials’ transfer decision was based on legitimate safety concerns. See Pratt v. Rowland, 65 F.3d 802, 806 (9th Cir.1995). Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion by not granting Garcia an…

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.