Contreras

MEMORANDUM **

California State prisoner Francisco Contreras appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without leave to amend, pursuant to the screening provisions of 28 U.S.C. *352 § 1915A(a). 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal of Contreras’s complaint without leave to amend. Kennedy v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 268 F.3d 763 , 767 (9th Cir.2001).

Contreras argues that the district court committed several procedural errors. We find it unnecessary to address these arguments, because Contreras’s complaint fails to state an Eighth Amendment violation. We accept as true all allegations of material fact and construe those facts in the light most favorable to the prisoner. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000).

“ ‘[Pjrison officials have a duty ... to protect prisoners from violence at the hands of other prisoners.’” Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 833 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) {quoting Cortes-Quinones v. Jimenez-Nettleship, 842 F.2d 556, 558 (1st Cir.1988)).

Id. at 834 (citations omitted). Although Contreras alleges that he was in danger of being assaulted, his…