McCoy
McCoy v. Adams
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Federal prisoner Reginald L. McCoy appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to state a claim his civil rights action alleging that prison officials violated his Eighth Amendment rights and that he was wrongfully disciplined. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th *271 Cir.2000) (dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) (dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed McCoy’s claim alleging mental or emotional injury because he failed to allege that he suffered anything more than a de minimis physical injury. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e); Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 627-29 (9th Cir.2002).
The district court properly dismissed McCoy’s claim that he was wrongfully disciplined because a judgment in his favor would imply the invalidity of the deprivation of his good-time credits. See Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 646 , 117 S.Ct. 1584 , 137 L.Ed.2d 906 (1997); Martin v. Sias, 88 F.3d 774, 775 (9th Cir.1996) (order).