Case Name: Bobby Jack SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART; et ah, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-13
Citations: 205 F. App'x 588
Docket Number: No. 05-15608
Parties: Bobby Jack SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART; et ah, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, GOULD and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 205
Pages: 588–589

Head Matter:
Bobby Jack SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART; et ah, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-15608.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 6, 2006.
Filed Nov. 13, 2006.
Bobby Jack Smith, Yuma, AZ, pro se.
Susanna Carballo Pineda, DAG, AGAZ, Office of the Arizona Attorney General, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: LEAVY, GOULD and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Arizona state prisoner Bobby Jack Smith appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in favor of prison officials in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendants violated his right to access the courts. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Beene v. Terhune, 380 F.3d 1149, 1150 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment to defendants because Smith's section 1983 action is barred by the statute of limitations because Smith did not file his action within the two-year limitations period. See A.R.S. § 12-545(1); De Luna v. Farris, 841 F.2d 312, 313 (9th Cir.1988).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.