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 by9th C i r . R . 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 i tho utoralar gu m ent , and there fore , deni es M cK enzi e’ s r equestfor ora l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). 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 GU ST AV O M c KENZI E, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. G . E L L I S , S e r g e a n t; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 12- 56841 D . C. N o . 3 : 1 0 - c v - 0 1 4 9 0 - LA BMDD 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 o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia L a rryA . B urns , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r24, 2013 ** B efo re: R A W L IN S O N , N . R . S M IT H , an dC H R IS T E N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C al i forni a s t at e pri soner G ust avo M cK enzi e app ea l s pro se fr om the di stri ct c ourt ’ s j udgm e ntdi s m i s s i ng hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1983 a c t i on a l l e gi ng F i r s ta nd F o u rte e n th A m e n d m e n t v io la tio n s a r is in g f r o m th e d e n ia l o f

ar e lig io u s d ie t to h im 

# FI LED OC T 04 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS12- 56841 2 a s aR a s t a f

a r i a 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 n o v o , Zuc c o P ar tne rs , L L Cv . D i gi m ar c C or

p. , 55 2 F . 3d 98 1, 98 9 (9th C i r. 20 09 ), a n dw e a f

f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed M cK enzi e’ s c l ai m for deni alof fr ee exer ci se of re l i gi on because denyi ng M cK enzi e’ s s peci alre qu es t s f or po ul tryw as c o n s is te n t w ith h is r e lig io u s d ie t, an db e c au s e r e g u la tio n s r e q u ir in g M c K e n z ie to r e - ap p lyto th e r e lig io u s d ie t p r o g r a m a t h is n e w p r is o n w e r e r e la te dto v a lid p e n o lo g ic a l in te r e s ts a n dd idn o t u n du lyb u r d e n h is ab ilityto p r a c tic e h is r e lig io n . Se e R es n i c k

v . A da ms , 34 8 F . 3d 76 3, 76 8-71 (9th C i r. 20 03 ) ( re qu i ri ng an ap p lic a tio n to p r o v id e ar e lig io u s d ie t d o e s n o t u n du lyb u r d e n ap r is o n e r ’s r ig h t to prac t i ce hi s r el i gi on ); W a rd v. W a l sh , 1 F . 3d 873, 877 ( 9th C i r . 1993) ( pr i s ons ha ve av a lidin te r e s t in k e e p in g th e irf o o ds e rv ic e s y s te m a d m in is tr a tiv e lys im p le ) ; se e al so T urner v . Sa

f ley , 482 U . S . 78, 89, 90- 91 ( 1987) ( r e gul a t i ons i m pi ngi ng on c o n s titu tio n a l r ig h ts a r e v a lidif r e a s o n ab lyr e la te dto v a lidp e n o lo g ic a l in te r e s ts ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dM c K e n z ie ’s e q u a l p r o te c tio n c la im because M cK enzi e f

ai l ed t o al l ege thatdefe nd ant s i nt ent i on al l y di sc ri m i nat ed a g a in s t h im b a s e do n h is r e lig io n b yf a ilin g , o n s o m e o c c a s io n s , to a c c o m m o d a te hi s s pe c i a l r e que s tt o be s e rve d poul trye ve n though he opt e d f orar e l i gi ous v e g e tar ian d ie t. Se e T

hornton v . C i t

yof St. H e le ns , 42 5 F . 3d 11 58 , 11 66 (9th C i r.12- 56841 3 2 0 0 5 ) ( to s ta te a n e q u a l p r o te c tio n c la im , “ap la in tif f m u s t s h o w th a t th e d e f

e n d an ts a c t e d w i th a n i nt e ntorpurpos e t o di s c r i m i na t e a ga i ns tthe pl a i nt i f f ba s e d upon m em bers hi p i n a prot ec t ed cl as s. ” ( ci t at i on and i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed)) ; s e e al s o B r uns v . N

at ’ l Cr e di t U ni on A dm i n. , 12 2 F . 3d 12 51 , 12 57 (9th C i r. 19 97 ) (“ [A ] l i bera l i nt erpret at i on of a c i vi l ri gh t s c om pl ai ntm ayno tsupp l y e ss ent i al e l e m e nt s of

the c l a i m tha tw e r e noti ni t i a l l ypl e d. ” ( c i t a t i on and i nt e rna l quot a t i on m arks om i tt ed)) . M c K e n z ie ’s r e q u e s t f

o rju d ic ia l n o tic e is g r an te d . See F e d. R . E vi d. 201. M c K e n z i e ’ s c o n t e n t i o n s r e g ar d i n g th e a l l e g e d l yi mp r o p e re x t e n s i o n o f t i me t o d ef endant s t o fi l e an answ ert o the com pl ai ntaf t erre m ov alar e unp er suas i ve. AF F I RME D.