Mills v. Curry

MEMORANDUM ^***

Junior Walker Mills, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing for failure to state a claim his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the prison allowed other prisoners to withdraw money from his prison account by fraud and/or forgery. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

The district court properly found that Mills’s complaint was most appropriately considered as a second amended complaint in a previously filed case against the same defendants (CV-N-01-0476-DWH(VPC)) and that the complaint did not cure the defects in Mills’s prior complaints. Consequently, the district court properly dismissed Mills’s complaint for failure to state a claim. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (holding that to show an Eighth Amendment violation, a prisoner must show that prison officials had a “sufficiently culpable state of mind”) (citations omitted); Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593, 596, 109 S.Ct. 1378, 103 L.Ed.2d 628 (1989) (holding that to show a Fourth Amendment violation, a prisoner must show “an intentional acquisition of physical control”); Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533, 104 S.Ct. 3194, 82 L.Ed.2d 393 (1984) (holding that deprivation of property results in no violation of due process if a plaintiff has meaningful post-deprivation remedies).

Mills’s remaining contentions lack merit.

Mills’s outstanding motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

*** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Circuit Rule 36-3.