Marc Endsley v. Octavio Luna

MEMORANDUM

Marc Anthony Lowell Endsley, who is committed to a state psychiatric hospital facility, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the denial of his requests to purchase his own personal computer violated his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s summary judgment and its grant of a motion to dismiss. Doe v. Abbott Labs., 571 F.3d 930, 933 (9th Cir.2009). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Endsley’s substantive due process claim because Endsley failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the denial of his requests for a personal computer was reasonably related to the legitimate, non-punitive governmental interests of safety and security. See Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 931-32 (9th Cir.2004) (consistent with substantive due process, civilly committed individuals are subject to “[Ilegitímate, non-punitive government interests,” such as facility management and security); Valdez v. Rosenbaum, 302 F.3d 1039, 1046 (9th Cir. 2002) (“A reasonable relationship between the governmental interest and the…