EUGENE A. MAUWEE, Sr. v. VALERIE OLIVAS, Lt.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EUGENE A. MAUWEE, Sr.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VALERIE OLIVAS, Lt.,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 14-16337
D.C. No. 3:12-cv-00580-RCJ-
WGC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Eugene A. Mauwee, Sr., appeals pro se from the
district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a
violation of his right to religious free exercise. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, and may affirm on any basis supported by the
FILED
JAN 27 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

record. San Jose Christian Coll. v. City of Morgan Hill, 360 F.3d 1024, 1029-30
(9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
Summary judgment was proper on Mauwee’s First Amendment claim
because Mauwee failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the
five-month deprivation of deer antlers used for Native American inmates’ sweat
lodge ceremonies burdened Mauwee’s religious expression. See Walker v. Beard,
789 F.3d 1125, 1138 (9th Cir. 2015) (elements of a free exercise claim); see also
O’Lone v. Estate of Shabazz, 482 U.S. 342, 351-52 (1987) (prisoners’ free exercise
rights are not violated where, although they were precluded from participating in a
particular religious ceremony, they were free to perform other rituals of their
religion).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
14-16337 2

-- 2 of 2 --