FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 20 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TIMOTHY WENDELL GRIMALDI, No. 11-16501
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00802-KJD-PAL
v.
MEMORANDUM *
JAMES GREG COX, Director of Prison;
et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Kent J. Dawson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 10, 2012 **
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Timothy Wendell Grimaldi appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging
constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
*
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).
review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to
state a claim. Hamilton v. Brown, 630 F.3d 889, 892 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Grimaldi’s due process claim because
Grimaldi failed to allege that his missed opportunity to appear before the pardon
board, his housing assignment, or any other deprivation or freedom from restraint
imposed “an atypical and significant hardship” on him in relation to the ordinary
incidents of prison life to give rise to a protected constitutional interest. Sandin v.
Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995); Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir.
1994) (per curiam) (property deprivation is not cognizable under § 1983 where
state law provides adequate post deprivation remedy); see also Nev. Rev. Stat.
§ 41.0322.
The district court properly dismissed Grimaldi’s access-to-courts claim
because Grimaldi failed to allege that any actual injury resulted from his limited
access to the prison law library and research materials. See Lewis v. Casey, 518
U.S. 343, 349-51, 353 n.3, 354-55 (1996) (prisoner must demonstrate that the
alleged shortcomings in the prison’s library or legal assistance program resulted in
actual injury and hindered his efforts to pursue a non-frivolous legal claim).
The district court properly dismissed Grimaldi’s deliberate indifference
claim because Grimaldi failed to allege facts to show that defendants were
2 11-16501
deliberately indifferent to his medical needs or safety. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511
U.S. 825, 837 (1994) (deliberate indifference requires that prison officials be aware
of facts from which they could infer the existence of a substantial risk of serious
harm and also draw the inference).
AFFIRMED.
3 11-16501