T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d byN i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). 11- 35327 NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J A M E S A R T H U R B A T T L E , J r ., P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. T R A V E L L O D G E M O T E L , John D oe; et a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 35327 D. C . No . 2 : 0 9 - c v - 0 0 8 1 8 - R AJ ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on R i c ha r d A . J one s , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d Jul y17, 2012 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , T H O M A S , an dS IL V E R M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Jam es A rthu r B att l e, Jr . , appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ctcourt ’ s s um m ary ju d g m e n t in h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g d e f e n d a n ts v io la te dh is 

# FI LED JU L 20 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 35327 2 c o n s titu tio n a l r ig h ts du r in g th e p e r io da f te rh is a rr e s t a n db e f

o r e h is in c a r c e r a tio n . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo, T og uchiv. Chung , 3 9 1 F 3 d1 0 5 1 , 1 0 5 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) , a n dw e a f f irm . T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y grant ed sum m ary j ud gm enton B att l e’ s e qu al prot ec t i on cl ai m s bec ause B att l e f ai l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctas to w h e th e rd e f

e n d a n ts in te n tio n a llyd is c r im in a te da g a in s t h im b a s e dup o n h is m e m b e r s h ip in ap r o te c te dc la s s . See F e d . R . C iv . P . 5 6 ( a ) ; B arr e n v . H arr i ngton , 15 2 F . 3d 11 93 , 11 94 (9th C i r. 19 98 ) ( order) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ygr a nt e d s um m a ryj udgm e nta s t o B a tt l e ’ s due p r o c e s s c la im s b e c au s e B a ttle f a ile dto r a is e ag e n u in e d is p u te o f m a te r ia l f

a c t a s to w h e th e rd e f

e n d a n ts ’ c o n du c t “s h o c k s th e c o n s c ie n c e .” C ou nt y of Sa cram ento v. L e w is , 52 3 U . S . 83 3, 84 5-49 (199 8). T h e d istrict co u rt p ro p er ly g ra n tedsu m m ary ju d g m en t as to B attl e’s c ons pi r a c yc l a i m s be c aus e B a tt l e f a i l e d t o i de nt i f

ya ny one w i th w hom the

“ de f e nda ntc ons pi r e d, how the yc ons pi r e d, a nd how the c ons pi r a c yl e d t o a depri vat i on of [hi s] const i tut i on al ri gh t s. ” H arris v . R oder i ck, 126 F . 3d 1189, 1196 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ) ; s e e al

s o Calde i r a v . C ount

yof Kauai , 8 6 6 F .2 d1 1 7 5 , 1 1 8 1 - 8 2 ( 9 th C i r . 1989) ( “ abs e nc e of as e c t i on 1983 de pr i va t i on of r i ght s pr e c l ude s as e c t i on 1 9 8 5 c la im p r e d ic a te do n th e s a m e a lle g a tio n s ” ) .11- 35327 3 T h e d istrict co u rt also p ro p er ly g ra n tedsu m m ary ju d g m en t as to B attl e’s cl ai m s und er18 U . S . C . §§ 24 1– 42 because these cr i m i nal st atut es do no tprov i de a p r iv a te r ig h t o f

a c tio n . Se e A ldabe v . A ldabe , 616 F . 2d 1089, 1092 ( 9th C i r1980) ( p e rc u r ia m ) . W e do notc ons i de rm a tt e r s nots pe c i f i c a l l yr a i s e d and a r gue d i n the ope ni ng b r ie f , o ra lle g a tio n s r a is e df

o rth e f ir s t tim e o n ap p e a l. Se e P adge t t v . W r i ght , 587 F . 3d 98 3, 98 5 n . 2 (9th C i r. 20 09 ) ( per c uri am ). B att l e’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s, i ncl ud i ng tho se concerni ng evi dent i ary i ss ues, ar e unp er suas i ve. AF F I RME D.