Keith Arline, Jr. v. G. Janda

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 03 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KEITH DUANE ARLINE, JR., No. 15-55294
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-02450-JLS-NLS
v.
MEMORANDUM*
G. J. JANDA, Associate Warden; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 26, 2016**
Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges
California state prisoner Keith Duane Arline, Jr., appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a due
process claim arising from a disciplinary hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th
*
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).
Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because Arline failed
to raise a genuine dispute of fact as to whether defendant Powell’s findings were
not supported by some evidence. See Superintendent v. Hill, 472 U.S. 445, 455
(1985) (requirements of due process are satisfied if “some evidence” supports the
disciplinary decision); see also Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-70 (1974)
(setting forth due process requirements for prison disciplinary proceedings).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-55294