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 pane 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 ar 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 ER I C L AM ON T GON ZALE Z, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. P . M U L L E N , A p p e a ls C o o r d in a to r ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 16311 D . C. N o . 4 : 0 9 - c v - 0 0 9 5 3 - CW 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 l audi aA . W i l ke n, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d Jul y12, 2011 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , A L A R C Ó N , an dL E A V Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C a l i f orni as t a t e pr i s one rE r i c L a m ontG onz a l e z appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc 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 num e r ous c ons t i tut i ona l vi ol a t i ons a ga i ns tpr i s on of f i c i a l s . 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 adi s m i s s a l unde r28 U . S . C . § 1915A f or 

# FI LED JU L 26 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 16311 2 f a ilu r e to s ta te ac la im . R es ni ck v. H ayes , 2 1 3 F .3 d4 4 3 , 4 4 7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) . W e m a ya f f irm o n a n yg r o u n ds up p o rte db yth e r e c o r d . T ri m b le v. C i t

y o f Sa n ta R o sa , 4 9 F .3 d5 8 3 , 5 8 4 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 5 ) ( p e rc u r ia m ) . W e a f f irm in p art, v a c a te in p art, a n dr e m a n d . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dG o n z a le z ’s E ig h th A m e n d m e n t c la im c onc e rni ng the pr i s on’ s pol i c yof s hutt i ng of

f a n i nm a t e ’ s t oi l e tf

ora n hourupon ove rus e be c aus e G onz a l e z f a i l e d t o a l l e ge f

a c t s s ugge s t i ng tha the s uf f e r e d a s u f f ic ie n tlys e r io u s d e p r iv a tio n . Se e Farm e rv . B r e nnan , 511 U . S . 825, 834 ( 1994) ( t o s t a t e an E i ghth A m e ndm e ntc l a i m apr i s one rm us ts how the de ni a l of “ the m i ni m a l c i vi l i z e d m e a s ur e of l i f e ’ s ne c e s s i t i e s ” ( c i t a t i on and i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rk s o m itte d ) ) . D i s m i s s a l of

G onz a l e z ’ s F i r s tA m e ndm e ntc l a i m s w a s pr ope rbe c aus e , t o the ext entthatG on za l ez al l eged cogn i zabl e F i rs tA m endm enti nt er es t s, the cont es t ed p r is o n p o lic ie s a r e r a tio n a llyr e la te dto le g itim a te p e n o lo g ic a l in te r e s ts . See T urner v. Sa f ley , 4 8 2 U .S . 7 8 , 8 9 ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Th e d i s tr i c tc o u rtp r o p e r l yd i s mi s s e dG o n z a l e z ’ s e qu a l p r o t e c t i o n c l a i ms c o n c e rn in g te le v is io n c h an n e ls a n df ilm s b e c au s e G o n z a le z f a ile dto a lle g e f

a c ts d e m o n s tr a tin g ad is c r im in a to ryin te n t. Se e W a s h in g to n v . D a v is , 426 U . S . 229, 2 3 8 - 4 0 ( 1 9 7 6 ) .10- 16311 3 T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dG o n z a le z ’s du e p r o c e s s c la im concerni ng the al l eged i m prop erproces si ng of hi s gri evance bec ause G on za l ez has n o du e p r o c e s s r ig h t to th e h an d lin g o f g r ie v an c e s in a n yp artic u larm an n e r . See Ma n n v . A da ms , 85 5 F . 2d 63 9, 64 0 (9th C i r. 19 88 ) ( order) . H ow e ve r , di s m i s s a l of

G onz a l e z ’ s E i ghth A m e ndm e ntc l a i m c onc e rni ng show ershoes w as i m prop eratthi s e ar l y s t age because G on za l ez ’ s a l l egat i on s that h is in ab ilityto o b ta in s h o w e rs h o e s p u t h im a t r is ko f e x p o s u r e to s e r io u s b a c te r ia w e r e n o t f

r iv o lo u s . Se e Ke e n a n v . H a ll , 83 F . 3d 1083, 1091 ( 9th C i r . 1996) (i nd i genti nm at es have the ri gh tt o p er sonal hygi ene s up pl i es ). D i sm i ss alof G on za l ez ’ s e qu alprot ec t i on cl ai m concerni ng di ff er ent i al treatm en to f m al e an dfem al e i n m at es w as al so i m p ro p er atth i s earl y st ag e b ecau se G o n z a le z a lle g e df

a c ts s u g g e s tin g th a t p r is o n o f f ic ia ls d is c r im in a te da g a in s t h im b a s e do n h is g e n d e rw ith o u t p e n o lo g ic a l ju s tif ic a tio n . Se e W

as hi ngton , 42 6 U . S . at 238- 40. G o n z a le z ’s r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s a r e u n p e r s u a s iv e . G o n z a le z s h a ll b e arh is o w n c o s ts o n ap p e a l. AF F I RME D i n p a r t , V AC AT E D i n p a r t , a n d RE MAND E D.