NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EARNEST S. HARRIS, No. 18-15422
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:16-cv-01487-JST
v.
MEMORANDUM*
E. McCUMSEY, Ms.; Senior Librarian, The
Law Library, Pelican Bay State Prison,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 19, 2019**
Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Earnest S. Harris appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-to-
courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo.
Brodheim v. Cry, 584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Harris failed
to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he suffered an actual injury
as a result of defendant’s conduct. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 353-54
(1996) (setting forth elements of access-to-courts claim and actual injury
requirement).
We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See
Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2