Raymond Sherman, Sr. v. Suzzan Hubbard

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RAYMOND SHERMAN, Sr., No. 09-15669 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01605-GEB- KJM v. SUZZAN HUBBARD, Director of MEMORANDUM * Corrections; N. GRANNIS, Chief of Inmate Appeals; D. K. SISTO, Warden; E. PRYOR, SAOI(S) CSP Solano; S. CERVANTES, Correctional Counselor II, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding ** Submitted August 10, 2010 Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. Raymond Sherman, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to state claim. We have * 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). jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s decision to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim. Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. Sherman’s claim that the defendants prematurely authorized a restitution payment from his prison account does not state a cognizable constitutional claim because he has an adequate remedy under the California Tort Claims Act. See Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d 734, 737-38 (9th Cir. 2001). Likewise, Sherman’s arguments about the inadequacies of the prison appeals process do not state a cognizable constitutional claim because Sherman does not have a constitutional right to a particular grievance process. See Ramirez v. Galazza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2003). We have considered and are not persuaded by Sherman’s remaining contentions. AFFIRMED. 2 09-15669