N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT STEPHEN A. C HER

R Y, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. DEWAYNE SHEDD; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 11-35795 D.C . No. 3:10-c v-00271-LM B M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ida

ho Larry M . B o y le , M a gistra te Judge , Pre siding ** Subm itte d Oc t obe r 15, 2013 *** B e fore : FISHER , GOULD, a nd B YB EE, C irc uit Judge s. Idaho sta te prisone r Ste p he n A. C h e rry a ppe a l s pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismi ssing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c t ion. W e have jurisdic t ion 

# FIL ED OCT 25 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** C he rry

c onse nte d to proc e e d be fore a m a gistra te judge . S

e e28 U.S.C . § 636(c ).

*** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2). C he rry ’ s re q ue st for a te le phone he aring is de nie d.unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie wde novo thedistric t c ourt’ s dismissa l for

fa ilure to sta

t e a c l a im unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1915A. Silv a v . Di Vittorio , 658 F.3d 1090, 1101 (9th C ir. 2011). W e a ffirm in pa rt, va c at e in pa

rt, a nd re m and. The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d C he rry ’ s Fourth, Eighth, a nd Fourte e nth Am e ndm e nt c la i m s a ga inst a ll de fe nda nts be c a use the a l le gations in his c om pla i nt fa ile d to sta

te a c la im for re lie f unde r those c onstitutiona l provisions. Se eHudson v . Palme r , 468 U.S. 517, 526 (1984) (“ [T] he Fourth Am e ndm e nt prosc ription ag a inst unre a sona b le se arc he s doe s not a

pply within thec onfine s of the p rison c e ll.” ); Farme r v . Bre nnan , 511 U.S. 825, 833-34, 837 (1994) (se tting forth e le m e nts of Eighth Am e ndm e nt c la im); N

. Pac ific a LLC

v . C ity of Pac ific a , 526 F.3d 478, 486 (9th C ir. 2008) (se tting forth e le m e nts of e qua l prote c tion c la im); se e also Graham v. C onnor , 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989) (whe re a pa rtic ula r Am e ndm e nt “provide s a

n e xplic it te xtua l sourc e of c onstitutiona l prote c tion” a ga inst a pa

rtic ula r sort of governm e nt be havior, “ t hat Am e ndm e nt, not the m ore ge ne ra liz e d notion of ‘ substa ntive due proc e ss,’ m

u st be the guide for ana ly z ing the s e c la im s” ). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d C he rry ’ s a c c e s s-to-c ourts c la im a ga inst de fe nda nts Southwic k, R e inke , a

nd Lore llo be c a

use C he rry

fa ile d to a l le ge fa c ts de m onstra

ting the ir pe rsona l pa

rtic ipat ion in thea lle ge d viola tions. Se eStarr v .

1 1 - 3 5 7 9 5 2Bac a , 652 F.3d 1202, 1206-07 (9th C ir. 2011) (a pla intiff m ust ple a d tha

t e a c h de fe nda nt viola te d the C o nstitution through his own individua l a c tions). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d C he rry ’ s a c c e s s-to-c ourts c la im a ga inst de fe nda nt She d d be c a

u se it wa s ba

rre d by the a pplic a ble sta tute of lim ita

tions, a nd it wa s e vide nt from C he rry ’ s c o m pla int a nd supple m e nta l c o m

pla int tha t ne i the r de la y e d disc ove ry

nor a c ontinuing viola

tions the o ry

a pplie d to e xte n d the lim ita tions pe riod. Se e Idaho C ode Ann. § 5-219(4); K nox v . Dav is , 260 F.3d 1009, 1012-13 (9th C ir. 2001) (sta te pe rsona l injury

sta tute of lim ita

tions a pplie s to § 1983 a c tions; a

c la im a c c rue s whe n the pla intiff knows or ha s re a son to know of the i njury whic h is the ba sis of thea c tion, a nd the c ontinuing im

pa c t from pa st viola tions doe s not c a

use a c la i m to a c c rue ane w). The distric t c ourt e rre d, howe ve r, in dismissing a t this e a rly sta ge in the proc e e dings C he rry ’ s a c c e ss-to-c ourts c la im a g a inst de fe nda

nt Kirkm an a s ba

rre d by the sta tute of lim ita

tions a s it wa s not e vide nt from the fa c e of C he rry ’ s c om pla i nt a nd supple m e nta l c om

pla int tha t the de la y e d disc ove ry

rule would not a pply to e xte nd the lim ita

tions pe riod. S

e eC e rv ante s v . C i ty of San Die

go , 5 F.3d 1273, 1276-77 (9th C ir. 1993) (noting dism issa l on sta

tute of lim ita

tions grounds is disfa vore d whe re the c o m

pla i nt, libe ra lly

c onstrue d in light of our “ notic e ple a ding” sy ste m , a de q

uat e ly a lle ge s fa c ts showing the pote ntia l a pplic a bility of
1 1 - 3 5 7 9 5 3tolling).

The distric t c ourt a l so pre m ature ly dismisse d C he rry ’ s a c c e ss-to-c ourts c la im s a ga inst de fe n da

nt s Higgins a

nd B la de s in light of this c ourt’ s inte rve ning de c ision in Silv a be c a

use the a lle gations in the

c om pla i nt, libe ra lly

c onstrue d, we re

“ suffic ie nt to m e e t

the low thre s hold for proc e e ding pa st thesc re e ning stage .” W ilhe lm v . Rotman , 680 F.3d 1113, 1123 (9th C i r. 2012); se eSilv a , 658 F.3d a t 1102-04 (e xpla ining tha

t prisone rs ha

ve the right to litiga

te , without ac tive inte rfe re nc e , c la i m s tha

t ha ve a re a sona ble ba sis in la

wor fa c t, a

nd c onc luding tha

t a lle gations tha

t de fe nda nts hindere d a

n inm ate ’ s a

bility to litiga

te his pe nding c ivil a c tion re s ulting in dism

issa l of the a c tion we re suffic ie nt to sta te a c la im). W e the re fore va c ate the dismissa l of C he rry ’ s a c c e ss-to-c ourts c la im s a ga inst de fe nda

nts B la d e s, Higgins, a

nd Kirkm a

n, a nd re m and for furthe r proc e e dings on the se c la i m s c onsiste nt with this disposition. W e a ffirm the distric t c ourt’ s dismissa l of C he rry ’ s Fourth, Eighth, a n d Fourte e nth Am e n dm e nt c l a im s and the dismissa l of the a c c e ss-to-c ourts c la im a ga inst de fe nda

nts Southwic k, R e inke , Lore llo, a

nd She dd. AFFIRM E D in par t; V ACAT E D in par t; and RE M ANDE D.

1 1 - 3 5 7 9 5 4