Buford

Buford v. Hicks

Good Law
88 F. App'x 274
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 26, 2004No. 03-15042; D.C. No. CV-02-5265-AWI(DLB)California158 words

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Timothy Buford appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 *275 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

After giving Buford an opportunity to amend his complaint, the district court properly dismissed his action for failure to state a claim because Buford’s allegations that he was served spoiled milk two days in a row did not rise to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation. See, e.g., Hernandez v. Denton, 861 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir.1988), vacated on other grounds, 493 U.S. 801 , 110 S.Ct. 37 , 107 L.Ed.2d 7 (1989).

AFFIRMED.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).