Knight
Knight v. City of Seattle
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Roger W. Knight appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment violations arising out of the impoundment of his vehicle. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Oliver v. Keller, 289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir.2002), and may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Flamingo Indus. (USA) Ltd. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 302 F.3d 985, 997 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.
*454 The district court properly granted summary judgment on Knight’s Fourth Amendment claim because the defendants had no Fourth Amendment obligation to offer Knight an opportunity to avoid impoundment of his vehicle. See United States v. Penn, 233 F.3d 1111, 1116 (9th Cir.2000) (discussing with approval United States v. Skillern, 947 F.2d 1268, 1275-76 (5th Cir.1991)).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Knight’s Fourteenth Amendment claim because the post-deprivation procedures provided under state law satisfied due process. See Wash. Rev. Code § 46.55.120 (2)(b); Gilbert v. Homar, 520 U.S. 924, 930-31 , 117 S.Ct. 1807 , 138 L.Ed.2d 120 (1997). Knight’s contention that Seattle…