Robert Bardo v. K. Clendenin

MEMORANDUM

Robert J. Bardo, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials violated his First Amendment rights by removing an ad containing nudity from his mail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Wong v. United States, 373 F.3d 952 , 966 n. 18 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly held that defendant prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity because Bardo did not have a clearly established First Amendment right to retain the ad depicting side-view nudity. See Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730, 739 , 122 S.Ct. 2508 , 153 L.Ed.2d 666 (2002) (“For a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Mauro v. Arpaio, 188 F.3d 1054, 1063 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc) (prohibitions on inmates possessing sexually explicit materials are reasonably related to penological interests).

The district court also properly dismissed the due process claims against…