Shick

MEMORANDUM **

Harold Dean Shick, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against prison officials alleging deliberate indifference and denial of due process. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. O’Keefe v. Van Boening, 82 F.3d 322 , 324 (9th Cir.1996). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants on Shick’s claim that he was denied due process in his disciplinary hearing because the disciplinary decision was supported by sufficient evidence in the record after a procedurally adequate hearing. See Neal v. Shimoda, 131 F.3d 818, 830-31 (9th Cir.1997).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Shick’s claim that he was denied due process by being placed in administrative segregation because freedom from administrative segregation does not give rise to a protected liberty interest. See May v. Baldwin, 109 F.3d 557, 565 (9th Cir.1997).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Shick’s claim of inadequate medical care because mis-diagnosis of a broken nose and a difference of opinion…