Case ID: f-appx_453/html/0714-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John MARSHALL, Warden; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 10-56113.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 27, 2011.
    
    Filed Oct. 11, 2011.
    John Smith, San Luis Obispo, CA, pro se.
    Neah Huynh, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, Mitchell Rishe, Esquire, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner John Smith appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUI-PA”) and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir.2010). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Smith’s First Amendment free exercise and RLUIPA claims because the prison’s restrictions on third-party purchases of prayer oil did not substantially burden Smith’s ability to practice his religion. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc — 1(a)(1)—(2); Shakur v. Schriro, 514 F.3d 878, 884-85 (9th Cir.2008).

We do not consider contentions raised for the first time on appeal. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir.1999).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.