Patterson

MEMORANDUM **

Barry Northcross Patterson appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials confiscated his personal property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Patterson’s claim that defendant Maciel violated due process by confiscating his photo album and disposing of his magazine that may have included in it postage stamps and personal photos, because the deprivation of inmate property by prison officials does not state a cognizable cause of action under section 1983 if the prisoner has an adequate post-deprivation state remedy, and Arizona provides such a remedy. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 , 104 S.Ct. 3194 , 82 L.Ed.2d 393 (1984); A.R.S. § 12-821.01.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Patterson’s claim that *530 defendant Walker retaliated against him by denying him access to his stored property and changed the description of his headphones, because Patterson did not submit…