Morgan

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Jonathan Morgan appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 action alleging that prison officials violated his constitutional rights by confiscating his legal materials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a grant of summary judgment, Margolis v. Ryan, 140 F.3d 850, 852 (9th Cir.1998), and we can affirm on any ground supported by the record, Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1076-77 (9th Cir.2003).

To the extent Morgan alleged prison officials retaliated against him for filing actions in federal court, the evidence establishes that his legal materials were confiscated for a legitimate penological purpose. See Hines v. Gomez, 108 F.3d 265, 267 (9th Cir.1997).

To the extent Morgan alleged violation of his right to access the courts, he did not show that the confiscation of his legal materials adversely affected his prosecution of a non-frivolous legal action. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 , 353 n. 3, 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996).

Morgan’s conspiracy claim fails because he did not allege or present evidence to establish there was an…