Moore

MEMORANDUM **

Charles W. Moore appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights by denying pro se litigants access to the Yakima County Law Library. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We construe the district court’s dismissal order as a judgment on the pleadings because defendants filed their motion to dismiss after filing an answer. See MacDonald v. Grace Church Seattle, 457 F.3d 1079, 1081 (9th Cir.2006). We review de novo, id., and we affirm.

*671 The district court properly dismissed Moore’s access-to-courts claim because the complaint does not allege: (1) a nonfrivo-lous, arguable underlying claim, whether anticipated or lost; (2) the official acts frustrating the litigation; and (3) to the extent a backward-looking claim is alleged, a remedy that may be awarded as recompense that is not available in a future action. See Christopher v. Harbury, 536 U.S. 403, 415-16 , 122 S.Ct. 2179 , 153 L.Ed.2d 413 (2002); see also Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 350-51 , 353 & n. 3, 116 S.Ct. 2174 , 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (explaining that access to a law library is “merely one constitutionally…