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 p p . P . 3 4 (a )( 2 ). A cc o rd in g ly, ap p ellan t’ s r e q u e s t f o ro r a l a r g u m e n t is d e n ie d .

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 AR L E N P OR T E R S MI T H, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. M I C H A E L W A S H I N G T O N , in d iv id u a lly a nd i n hi s of

f i c i a l c apa c i tya s am e m be rof th e O r e g o n S ta te B o a r d o f P a r o le ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 09- 35157 D . C. N o . 3 : 0 5 - c v - 0 6 3 0 1 - BR 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 D i s tr i c tof

O r e gon A nnaJ . B r ow n, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r19, 2010 ** B efo re: O ’ S C A N N L A IN , T A L L M A N , an d B E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A rl en P ort erS m i th, an O re go n st at e pri soner, appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ct court ’ s j ud gm entdi sm i ss i ng hi s 42 U . S . C . § 1 98 3 act i on al l egi ng const i tut i on al 

# FI LED OC T 29 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS09- 35157 2 vi ol a t i ons i n c onne c t i on w i th pa r ol e he a r i ngs a nd hi s a c c e s s t o the c ourt s . W e ha ve ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o . W h ita ke rv . G a r c e tti , 48 6 F . 3d 57 2, 57 9 (9th C i r. 20 07 ) ( di sm i ss al un der H ec k v . H um ph re y , 5 1 2 U . S. 47 7, 48 6-87 (199 4)); W y at t v . T e rhune , 315 F . 3d 1108, 1117 ( 9th C i r . 2003) (di sm i ss al for f

ai l ure t o exh austadm i ni stra t i ve re m edi es ). W here the di stri ctcourt f a i l s t o a d d r e s s aR u l e 5 6 ( f ) m o t i o n p r i o rt o g r a n t i n g s u m m a ryj u d g m e n t , we r e v ie w d e n o v o its im p lic it d e c is io n n o t to p e rm it a d d itio n a l d is c o v e ry . M a r g o lis v . R y an , 1 4 0 F. 3 d 8 5 0 , 8 5 3 ( 9 th Ci r . 1 9 9 8 ) . W e a f f i rm. T h e d i stri ctco u rtp ro p erl y d i sm i ssed S m i th ’ s cl ai m s reg ard i n g d efen d an t s’ r e f us a l t o r e i ns t a t e f

or f e i t e d good- t i m e c r e di t s be c aus e S m i th di d nota l l e ge tha tthe d e c is io n h a d b e e n in v a lid a te d . See H ec k , 512 U . S . a t486- 87 ( ba rr i ng s e c t i on 1983 a c t i ons w he n j udgm e nti n f a vorof the pl a i nt i f

f w oul d ne c e s s a r i l yi m pl ythe i nv al i di ty of ase nt ence no totherw i se i nv al i dat ed); E dw ards v . B al is ok , 5 2 0 U . S. 641, 646- 48 ( 1997) ( appl y i ng H ec k t o s e c t i on 1983 c l a i m tha ti m pl i c a t e d the r e v o c a tio n o f

g o o d tim e c r e d its ) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l ydi s m i s s e d S m i th’ s a c c e s s - t o- c ourt s a nd r e t a l i a t i on c la im s b e c au s e S m ith f

a ile d to e x h au s t a d m in is tr a tiv e r e m e d ie s p r io rto f ilin g s u it. Se e W oodf ord v . N go , 548 U . S . 81, 90, 95 ( 2006) ( “ pr ope re xhaus t i on” unde r4209- 35157 3 U . S . C . § 1997e ( a ) i s m a nda t orya nd r e qui r e s a dhe r e nc e t o a dm i ni s tr a t i ve p r o c e d u r a l ru le s ) . T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on by de ny i ng S m i th’ s r e que s tf or a ddi t i ona l di s c ove ryunde rR ul e 56( f ) be c aus e S m i th di d nots how how a l l ow i ng h im a d d itio n a l d is c o v e ryw o u ld h a v e p r e c lu d e d s u m m a ryju d g m e n t. Se e M a r g o lis , 140 F . 3d a t853- 54 ( uphol di ng i m pl i c i tde ni a l of R ul e 56( f

) di s c ove rym ot i on w he r e appe l l a ntf

a i l e d t o i de nt i f

y f a c t s , e i the rdi s c ove r e d orl i ke l yt o be di s c ove r e d, thatw ou l d p re cl ud e s um m ary j ud gm ent ). C ontr a ryt o S m i th’ s c ont e nt i on, the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on b yd e n y in g f

u rth e rle a v e to a m e n d . Se e Mi lle rv . Y okoham a T

i r e C or p. , 358 F . 3d 61 6, 62 2 (9th C i r. 20 04 ) ( “ W here the pl ai nt i ff has pre vi ou sl y f

i l ed an am ended c o m p la in t, . . . th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d is c r e tio n to d e n yle a v e to a m e n d is p a rtic u la r ly broad. ”) (c i t at i on and i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed). S m i th’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.