John A. Mosier, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Denise Spears, Defendant-appellee,andjon Doe, Jane Doe, Defendants, 991 F.2d 805 (10th Cir. 1993)

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(e); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff John A. Mosier, a state prisoner, filed suit for damages and other relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendant claiming she deprived him of due process when she ordered his removal from a job within the prison. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant, and plaintiff appealed. We affirm.

The crux of Mr. Mosier's complaint is his contention that he acquired a liberty interest in his prison job that could not be taken from him without benefit of due process. This contention is without foundation. We have said, " [t]he Constitution does not create a liberty interest in prison employment." Ingram v. Papalia, 804 F.2d 595, 596 (10th Cir. 1986). Also see Twyman v. Crisp, 584 F.2d 352, 356 (10th Cir. 1978). Without the implication of a liberty interest, Mr. Mosier's case fails.

AFFIRMED.