Case Name: Cardell VAN MATHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.Q. HICKMAN; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-28
Citations: 35 F. App'x 653
Docket Number: No. 01-16824; D.C. No. CV-00-00611-GEB/JFM
Parties: Cardell VAN MATHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.Q. HICKMAN; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 35
Pages: 653–654

Head Matter:
Cardell VAN MATHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R.Q. HICKMAN; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-16824.
D.C. No. CV-00-00611-GEB/JFM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 13, 2002 .
Decided May 28, 2002.
Before FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Cardell Van Mathis appeals pro se the district court's judgment dismissing without leave to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that prison officials violated his constitutional rights by opening his legal mail outside his presence and disclosing its contents to the defendants in another one of Mathis's pending civil actions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we reverse in part, vacate in part, and remand.
Because Mathis may be able to spell out a claim, we reverse the district court's denial of leave to amend, and also vacate the district court's determination on qualified immunity. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc).
Each party shall bear its own costs on appeal.
REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.