Walck

MEMORANDUM **

Mitchell Lee Walck appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying his motion for leave to amend his complaint and granting summary judgment to the defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that they violated his civil rights by falsely arresting him, using excessive force, and displaying deliberate indifference to his well-being during his arrest, transportation, and confinement. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend, Ditto v. McCurdy, 510 F.3d 1070, 1079 (9th Cir.2007), and review de novo the grant of summary judgment, id. at 1075 . We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Walck leave to amend his complaint. Walck’s proposed amendments under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986 would have been futile because the new claims did not involve interference with federal agents, obstruction of justice in court, or alleged membership of a protected class. See Sever v. Alaska Pulp Corp., 978 F.2d 1529, 1536 (9th Cir.1992) (describing membership in a protected class requirements for § 1985(3) claims). Walck’s proposed amendments alleging conspiracy under section 1983…