Peter Hansen v. Mark Malloy , 521 F. App'x 632 ( 2013 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 31 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PETER C. HANSEN, No. 11-17070
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:10-cv-00110-RCJ-VPC
v.
MEMORANDUM *
MARK MALLOY and STATE OF
NEVADA, ex rel., its Department of
Public Safety, Nevada Highway Patrol,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Robert Clive Jones, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted May 17, 2013
San Francisco, California
Before: CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges, and KORMAN, District Judge.**
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable Edward R. Korman, District Judge for the Eastern
District of New York, sitting by designation.
Plaintiff Peter C. Hansen appeals the district court’s summary judgment
against him on his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for retaliation in violation of the
First Amendment. We affirm.
The First Amendment does not empower public employees to
constitutionalize the employee grievance. Desrochers v. City of San Bernadino,
572 F.3d 703, 718 (9th Cir. 2009). If the employee does not speak on a matter of
public concern, then his claim fails. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 146 (1983).
The public concern requirement of a retaliation claim is the first step in the five-
step sequential inquiry set forth in Eng v. Cooley, 552 F.3d 1062, 1070 (9th Cir.
2009). Whether the employee spoke on a matter of public concern “must be
determined by the content, form, and context” of the statements. Id. (internal
quotation marks omitted). Hansen’s internal grievances concerned his personal
employee evaluations and discipline, not any purported effect on the public or even
other officers. Thus, the district court correctly concluded that Hansen’s grievances
did not constitute a matter of public concern. Accordingly, the decision to grant
summary judgment was correct.
AFFIRMED.
2