Randy Trimble v. Michael Montiel

MEMORANDUM

Arizona state prisoner Randy G. Trim-ble appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (a), 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 Trimble’s access-to-courts claim because Trimble failed to allege an actual injury. 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 liti-gration).

The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendant Ellis because Trimble failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Ellis knew that his alleged statement would create a serious risk of harm to Trimble. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (to state a claim for deliberate indifference, “the official must both be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm…