Epstein

MEMORANDUM **

1. The prison authorities did not deny Michael Epstein due process of law by disallowing visits from his wife, a former employee of a contractor for the Nevada Department of Prisons. “The denial of prison access to a particular visitor is well within the terms of confinement ordinarily contemplated by a prison sentence, and therefore is not independently protected by the Due Process Clause.” Ky. Dep’t of Corrs. v. Thompson, 490 U.S. 454, 461 , 109 S.Ct. 1904 , 104 L.Ed.2d 506 (1989) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Nor do the Nevada Department of Prisons regulations providing for visits by former prison staff with the permission of the prison authorities create a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause, because such permission is discretionary and the denial of such visits is within the possible terms of an inmate’s confinement. See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484-87 , 115 S.Ct. 2293 , 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995); Mujahid v. Meyer, 59 F.3d 931, 932 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam).

2. Although the Nevada Department of Prisons regulations give prison authorities discretion to prohibit visits by former prison staff, this discretion may not be…