Looman

MEMORANDUM **

Ronald G. Looman, a Montana state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district *730 court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000) (dismissal under § 1915A); Big Bear Lodging Ass’n v. Snow Summit, Inc., 182 F.3d 1096 , 1101 & n. 1 (9th Cir.1999) (dismissal -without leave to amend). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed with prejudice Looman’s due process claims against defendants Richardson and Gootkin based on their involvement in the administrative appeals process because prisoners do not have a liberty interest in a particular grievance procedure. See Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir.2003).

The district court determined that Looman’s allegation that he was deprived of his pain medication for up to eight hours the day after he had hernia surgery was “not objectively sufficiently serious to acquire constitutional dimension.” We disagree. Under these circumstances, the “severe pain” that Looman allegedly suffered during the…