Adam

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Adam appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in favor of defendants following a jury trial in his civil rights action alleging racial discrimination and violation of his right to equal protection of the law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We reject Adam’s contention that defendants’ attorney engaged in purposeful discrimination by using peremptory challenges to exclude prospective Caucasian jurors because of their race. The district court correctly ruled that defendants’ attorney offered legitimate race-neutral reasons for striking the jurors in question. See Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 767 , 115 S.Ct. 1769 , 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995) (per curiam) (explaining that, to rebut prima facie showing of racial discrimination in jury selection, proponent of peremptory challenge must offer a facially valid race-neutral explanation for striking prospective juror); Johnson v. Campbell, 92 F.3d 951, 953 (9th Cir.1996) (reviewing for clear error a district court’s findings regarding claim of purposeful discrimination in the jury selection process).

We also reject Adam’s contention that the district court abused its discretion by…