Hampton

MEMORANDUM **

Arizona state prisoner Mark E. Hampton appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional violations stemming from his placement and continuing confinement in administrative segregation. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Hampton’s due process claim challenging his initial placement in administrative segregation because he admitted that he was given notice of the factual basis for the placement and an opportunity to be heard. See Toussaint v. McCarthy, 801 F.2d 1080, 1100 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding that placement in administrative segregation only requires notice to prisoner, opportunity for prisoner to submit information, and non-adversary review of information supporting placement). Moreover, Hampton failed to controvert defendants’ showing that there was “some evidence” to demonstrate his membership in the Aryan Brotherhood. See Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1287-88 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that a prison gang validation proceeding is…