Case ID: f-appx_207/html/0788-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Melvin JONES, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Don STRANGIO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 05-15493.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 6, 2006 .
    Filed Nov. 15, 2006.
    Melvin Jones, Jr., Modesto, CA, pro se.
    Patrick Michael Callahan, Esq., Stephen Brooks, Esq., Gordon & Rees, LLP, Louis H. Castoria, Esq., Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Theodore C. Zayner, Forge and Zayner, San Jose, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: LEAVY, GOULD, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Melvin Jones, Jr. appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his constitutional rights were violated in connection with a custody dispute over his daughter. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm because Jones presents no issue of fact that the defendants violated his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.