Fred Jay Jackson v. M. D. BITER, Warden

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRED JAY JACKSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
M. D. BITER, Warden,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 21-17026
D.C. No. 1:21-cv-00774-DAD-
BAM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 14, 2023**
Before: SILVERMAN, SUNG, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Fred Jay Jackson appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-to-
courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim. Mangiaracina v.
* 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).
FILED
MAR 17 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-17026
Penzone, 849 F.3d 1191, 1195 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Jackson’s action because Jackson
failed to allege facts sufficient to show that his inability to appear at the summary
judgment hearing in his underlying state court case affected the outcome of his
case. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-53 (1996) (elements of an access-to-
courts claim and actual injury requirement).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --