Barry Lamon v. Derral Adams

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Barry Louis Lamon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging civil rights violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo both a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and summary judgment, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Lamon’s retaliation claims at screening because the third amended complaint failed to allege facts suggesting that the defendants retaliated against Lamon for exercising a constitutionally protected right or that the actions they took did not reasonably advance a legitimate correctional goal. See Resnick, 213 F.3d at 449 (setting forth standard).

The district court also properly dismissed Lamon’s claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act because Lamon’s conclusory allegations failed to identify the specific conduct by defendants that purportedly violated Lamon’s rights under the Act. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 , 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (“requiring enough facts…