John Gholar v. James Yates

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OCT 21 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS JOHN RAY GHOLAR, No. 13-17388 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01182-LJO-SAB v. MEMORANDUM* JAMES A. YATES, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 14, 2014 ** Before: LEAVY, GOULD, and BERZON, Circuit Judges. John Ray Gholar appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of access to the courts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. * 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). § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Gholar’s action because Gholar failed to allege sufficient facts to show any actual injury due to the alleged inadequate prison law library access. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-49 (1996) (access-to-courts claim requires the plaintiff to show that the defendants’ conduct caused actual injury to a non-frivolous legal claim). Appellee’s request for judicial notice is granted. See Fed. R. Evid. 201. AFFIRMED. 1 2 13-17388