Case ID: f-appx_398/html/0305-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John HARDNEY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Anthony LAMARQUE, Warden; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 09-17464.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 22, 2010.
    
    Filed Oct. 6, 2010.
    John Frederick Hardney, Corcoran, CA, pro se.
    Kelli Hammond, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The district court properly granted summary judgment because the uncontroverted evidence shows that defendants’ alleged acts or omissions did not cause Hardney’s untimely filing of a habeas petition. See Vandelft v. Moses, 31 F.3d 794, 797-98 (9th Cir.1994) (prisoner alleging inadequate access to courts must show how inadequate access caused actual injury); see also Glenn K Jackson Inc. v. Roe, 273 F.3d 1192,1202 (9th Cir.2001) (“[A] district court may grant summary judgment on any legal ground the record supports.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

Hardney’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

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