FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 23 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CLARENCE LEONARD HEARNS, Jr., No. 16-15261
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:14-cv-00408-BAM
v.
MEMORANDUM*
KELLEY HARRINGTON; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Barbara A. McAuliffe, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted December 14, 2016***
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Clarence Leonard Hearns, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se
from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
Hearns consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(c).
***
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
a First Amendment access-to-courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and
1915(e)(2)(B). Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000); Barren v.
Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Hearns’s action because Hearns failed
to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d
338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, a
plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for
relief); see also Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-49, 352-53 (1996) (an access-
to-courts claim requires a plaintiff to show that defendants’ conduct caused actual
injury to a non-frivolous legal claim); Silva v. Di Vittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1103
(9th Cir. 2011) (prisoners have a constitutional right to litigate claims challenging
their sentence or conditions of confinement without interference from prison
officials), overruled on other grounds as stated by Richey v. Dahne, 807 F.3d 1202,
1209 n.6 (9th Cir. 2015).
AFFIRMED.
2 16-15261