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 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). 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 ON AT HA N W. GR I GS B Y, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. R O B E R T A . H O R E L , W a r d e n ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 17587 D . C. N o . 3 : 0 8 - c v - 0 1 4 7 5 - CRB 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 N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia C ha r l e s R . B r e y e r , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J une 18, 2013 ** B efo re: T A L L M A N , M . S M IT H , an dH U R W IT Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J ona tha n W . G r i gs by , aC a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one r , appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s um m a ryj udgm e nti n 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 c la im s . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e 

# FI LED JU N 20 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 17587 2 r e v ie w d e n o v o , Ke e n a n v . H a ll , 8 3 F . 3 d1 0 8 3 , 1 0 8 8 ( 9 th C i r . 1 9 9 6 ) , a n dwe a f f i rm. T h e d i stri ctco u rtp ro p erl y g ran t ed su m m ary j u d g m en to n G ri g sb y’ s F i rst A m endm entcl ai m s bec ause G ri gsby fa i l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al f a c t a s to w h e th e rd e f

e n d a n ts p e r s o n a llyc au s e dth e a lle g e dd e p r iv a tio n o f h is c ons t i tut i ona l r i ght s ba s e d on the i s ol a t e d i nc i de nt s of api e c e of

m a i l notbe i ng d e liv e r e d a n d ap r io r itym a il p a c k a g e b e in g d e la y e df if te e n d a y s . See L ee r v . Mur phy , 84 4 F . 2d 62 8, 63 3 (9th C i r. 19 88 ) ( “ A pers on depri ves ano ther of a c ons t i tut i ona l r i ght , w i thi n the m e a ni ng of s e c t i on 1983, i f

he doe s a n a f

f i rm a t i ve a c t , pa rt i c i pa t e s i n a nothe r ’ s a f f i rm a t i ve a c t s , orom i t s t o pe r f orm a n a c tw hi c h he is le g a llyr e q u ir e d to d o th a t causes the depri vat i on of w hi ch the pl ai nt i ff com pl ai ns. ” ( ci t at i on , i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks, and b ra cket s om i tt ed)) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ygr a nt e d s um m a ryj udgm e nton G r i gs by ’ s due proces s c l ai m because G ri gsby fa i l ed t o rai se a genui ne di sput e of m at er i al fa ctas t o w he the rde f

e nda nt s w e r e pe r s ona l l yi nvol ve d i n the c onf i s c a t i on orde s truc t i on o f h is e x c e s s s ta m p s . Se e i d. W e r ej ec tG ri gsby’ s argum ent , ra i se d for the fi rs tt i m e on app ea l , thathe w as deni ed an op po rtun i ty t o o pp ose s um m ary j ud gm ent , because the evi dence11- 17587 3 desc ri bed i n G ri gsby’ s bri ef s w ou l d h ave been i nsuffi ci entt o d ef eatsum m ary ju d g m e n t. A FFI R M ED .