George Shufelt, III v. Linda Davis

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner George W. Shufelt, III, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging access-to-courts and retaliation claims. We review de novo, Brodheim v. Cry, 584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Shufelt’s access-to-courts claims because Shufelt failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he suffered actual injury as a result of prison officials’ alleged conduct. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-49 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (access-to-courts claim requires actual prejudice to contemplated or existing litigation, such as inability to meet a filing deadline or to present a claim); Alvarez v. Hill, 518 F.3d 1152 , 1155 n. 1 (9th Cir.2008) (an inmate’s failure to show that a nonfrivolous legal claim has been frustrated is fatal to his access-to-courts claim).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Shufelt’s retaliation claims because Shufelt failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether prison officials’ alleged actions served legitimate penological goals or…