Rocha

MEMORANDUM **

Abe Williams, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging he was improperly disciplined and denied access to the courts. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Williams’ claim that he was denied due process when prison officials subjected him to an erroneous disciplinary report because this claim is precluded by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486 , 114 S.Ct. 2364 , 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). See Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 646 , 117 S.Ct. 1584 , 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997) (Precluding challenges to procedures used in prison disciplinary hearings).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Williams’ claim that he was denied due process when he received notice of his disciplinary charge 6 days after the expiration of the regulatory notice period, because Williams failed to show that he was subject to an “atypical and significant hardship” See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 ,…