FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 17 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CLYDE KENNETH DAVIS, No. 09-15611
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:06-cv-04560-PJH
v.
MEMORANDUM *
NAVORRO, Sergeant; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 25, 2010 **
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Clyde Kenneth Davis, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that
defendants interfered with his access to courts. We have jurisdiction under 28
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.
1994) (per curiam). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Davis’s action because the amended
complaint failed to allege facts suggesting that he suffered an actual injury as a
result of defendants’ alleged actions. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348
(1996) (explaining that “actual injury” is “actual prejudice with respect to
contemplated or existing litigation, such as the inability to meet a filing deadline or
to present a claim”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Miller
v. Yokohama Tire Corp., 358 F.3d 616, 622 (9th Cir. 2004) (“Where the plaintiff
has previously filed an amended complaint . . . the district court’s discretion to
deny leave to amend is particularly broad.”) (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted).
Davis’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 09-15611