LaBranch

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Gary Wayne LaBranch appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging two prison disciplinary convictions resulting in the loss of 60 days of good time credits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Reviewing de novo, Lott v. Mueller, 304 F.3d 918, 922 (9th Cir.2002), we affirm.

LaBranch contends that his rights under the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth amendments were violated when the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) implemented new grooming standards establishing limits on hair length and requiring that inmates remain clean-shaven. LaBranch suffered two disciplinary convictions for failing to comply with the grooming regulations.

We conclude that the California state court’s decision was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). First, CDCR’s grooming regulations are reasonably related to legitimate penological interests, and are therefore a valid restriction of La-Branch’s First Amendment rights. See Henderson v. Terhune, 379 F.3d 709, 712-15 (9th Cir.2004);…