Dorenbos

Dorenbos v. Miller-Stout

Good Law
111 F. App'x 968
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 1, 2004No. 03-35309; D.C. No. CV-01-00382-AAMCalifornia290 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Alan Dorenbos appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that prison employees denied him access to courts and retaliated against him by confiscating his legal materials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the grant of summary judgment, Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Dorenbos’s access to courts claim because he failed to raise an issue of material fact as to whether the confiscation of his legal materials caused him to suffer actual injury. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 351-54 , 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996). We are not persuaded by Dorenbos’s contention that actual injury should be presumed.

Dorenbos’s contention that he should be allowed to amend his complaint is properly a request to file supplemental pleadings. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(d) (allowing “a supplemental pleading setting forth transactions or occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the [original] pleading”). Because Dorenbos did not raise supplementing his complaint with the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.