Free Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

‘ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS -
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BARRY NORTHCROSS PATTERSON, No. 06-15785
D.C. No. CV-03-02179-PGR
Plaintiff - Appellant,
_ v.
. JUDGMENT
MACIEL, sued in his individual & official ‘
capacity; et al., _
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix). 4
This cause came on to be heard on the Transcript of the Record from the A
United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Phoenix) and was duly
submitted. ·
On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this
Court, that the judgment ofthe said District Court in this cause be, and hereby is
AFFIRMED. . ·
Filed and entered 12/13/06 I
élIilf£8§%E¤so@v,,
Cierkof Court
_ ATIEST ; .,,· A U
Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAIVI Document 54 Filed O1/O9/2007 Page 1 of 4

Nor Fon 1>UrsL1cAr1oN DEC 13 2000
I . i CATHY A. carrenson ctenx
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 0-0- COURT OP APPPP0-S
_ FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BARRY NORTHCROSS PATTERSON, No. 06-15785
Plaintiff- Appellant, D.C. No. CV-03-02179-PGR
v.
‘ ` MEMORANDUM"
MACIEL, sued in his individual & official
capacity; et al.,
Defendants — Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Paul G. Rosenblatt, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 4, 2006** l
Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Barry Northcross Patterson appeals pro se from the district c0urt’s summary
judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials confiscated
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be
cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
M The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Case 2:O3—cv—O2179-PGR-VAIVI Document 54 Filed O1/O9/2007 Page 2 of 4

l his personal property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Teguchi v. Chung, 391
F.3d 105l, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Pattersorfs claim
that defendant Maciel violated due process by confiscating his photo album and
disposing of his magazine that may have included in it postage stamps and B
personal photos, because the deprivation of inmate property by prison officials
_ does not state a cognizable cause of action under section 1983 if the prisoner has
an adequate post-deprivation state remedy, and Arizona provides such a remedy.
See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984); A.R.S. § 12-821.01.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Patterson’s claim
that defendant Walker retaliated against him by denying him access to his stored
property and changed the description of his headphones, because Patterson did not
l submit any probative evidence that Walker denied him access to his stored
property or took action for retaliatory reasons. See King v. Ariyeh, 814 F.2d 565, _
1 568 (9th Cir. 1987) (“State officials are not subject to suit under section 1983
unless they play an affirmative part in the alleged deprivation of constitutional
rights.”).
2 .
Case 2:O3—cv—O2179-PGR-VAIVI Document 54 Filed O1/O9/2007 Page 3 of 4

The district court properly granted summary judgment as to Patterson’s
claim that defendant Schmier denied Patterson access to grievance forms, because
Patterson did not submit any probative evidence that Schmier denied Patterson
access to grievance forms, and because denial of grievance forms does not in and
of itself rise to the level of a constitutional violation. See Mann v. Adams, 855
_ F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1988) (order) ("There is no legitimate claim oaf up-
to a grievance procedure"). l
The- district court properly granted summary judgment as to Patterson’s
claims that defendants Schriro and Klein failed to stop prison staff abuses of the
rules regarding inmate property, because supervisory officials cannot be held
liable pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 under a respondeat superior theory. See
Graves v. City ofC0eur Diéilene, 339 F.3d 828, 848 (9th Cir. 2003) (supervising
officers can be held liable under section 1983 only if they play an affirmative part
in the alleged deprivation of constitutional rights) (quotations omitted).
Patterson’s remaining contentions lack merit. gg?-${E£g;%ER5ON
AF1¤*1RM1s;D. p Wim
,§ e ii iauiiseg 201*1
` 3
Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAIVI Document 54 Filed O1/O9/2007 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAM

Document 54

Filed 01/09/2007

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAM

Document 54

Filed 01/09/2007

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAM

Document 54

Filed 01/09/2007

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:03-cv-02179-PGR-VAM

Document 54

Filed 01/09/2007

Page 4 of 4