Gregory Goods v. David Baughman ( 2022 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 22 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GREGORY GOODS, No. 20-15365
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:18-cv-00732-JAM-EFB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
DAVID BAUGHMAN, Warden; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2022**
Before: SILVERMAN, MILLER, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Gregory Goods appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force
and deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Gregg v. Haw. Dep’t of Pub. Safety,
*
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).
870 F.3d 883, 886 (9th Cir. 2017) (dismissal as time-barred); Resnick v. Hayes,
213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Goods’s action because Goods failed to
file his action within the two-year statute of limitations or establish any basis for
tolling. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387, 394 (2007) (federal courts in
§ 1983 actions apply the state statute of limitations and borrow applicable tolling
provisions from state law); see also Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 335.1, 352.1, 352(a)
(setting forth two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims, a two-year
maximum statutory tolling due to imprisonment, and the availability of tolling for
mental incapacity); Cervantes v. City of San Diego, 5 F.3d 1273, 1275-1277 (9th
Cir. 1993) (stating California’s three-pronged test for equitable tolling and
explaining that dismissal may be appropriate when it is evident from the face of the
complaint that equitable tolling is unavailable as a matter of law).
AFFIRMED.
2 20-15365