Jackson v. Woodford

348 F. App'x 247
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided October 7, 2009·No. No. 07-16861·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Raymond D. Jackson, Sr. appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging, inter alia, that defendants denied him access to the courts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Aguilera v. Baca, 510 F.3d 1161, 1167 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Jackson’s access to courts claim because Jackson failed to raise a triable issue that he suffered “actual prejudice with respect to contemplated or existing litigation, such as the inability to meet a filing deadline or to present a claim.” Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996).

Jackson’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Jackson’s motion to correct a “clerical error” in his reply brief is granted.

[248] We grant in part Jackson’s motion for judicial notice filed on Dec. 12, 2008, and take judicial notice of the order denying a certificate of appealability filed on May 29, 2008. All other pending motions are denied.

We vacate in part and remand for the limited purpose of directing that the district court dismiss the pendent state claims without prejudice. See Wade v. Reg’l Credit Ass’n, 87 F.3d 1098, 1101 (9th Cir.1996).

Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal.

AFFIRMED in part, VACATED in part, and REMANDED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jackson v. Woodford, 348 F. App'x 247 (9th Cir. 2009).

348 F. App'x 247 (Jackson v. Woodford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lewis v. Casey
518 U.S. 343 (Supreme Court, 1996)
Aguilera v. Baca
510 F.3d 1161 (Ninth Circuit, 2007)