Theodore Andrews v. Kathleen Dickinson

MEMORANDUM

Theodore Andrews appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Andrews contends that the district court erred in dismissing his petition for failure to state a cognizable claim. The district court correctly concluded that Andrews’s petition challenging his “R” custody designation failed to raise a federally cognizable claim for which habeas relief may be granted. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489 , 93 S.Ct. 1827 , 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.