IVAN KILGORE V. ARNO NAPPI, No. 14-15711 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 20 2015 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT IVAN KILGORE, No. 14-15711 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01822-WBSKJN v. ARNO NAPPI, Senior Librarian; et al., MEMORANDUM* Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 10, 2015** Before: FARRIS, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges. Ivan Kilgore, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of access to the courts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Kilgore’s action because Kilgore failed to allege facts sufficient to show that he suffered an actual injury as a result of defendants’ conduct. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 348-53 (1996) (access-tocourts claim requires the plaintiff to show that the defendants’ conduct caused actual injury to a non-frivolous legal claim); see also Silva v. DiVittorio, 658 F.3d 1090, 1101-04 (9th Cir. 2011) (discussing “affirmative assistance” and “interference” access-to-courts claims). The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying leave to amend the second amended complaint because further amendment would have been futile. See Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008) (setting forth standard of review and explaining that denial of leave to amend is improper unless it is clear that the complaint could not be saved by amendment); see also Metzler Inv. GMBH v. Corinthian Colls., Inc., 540 F.3d 1049, 1072 (9th Cir. 2008) (a district court’s discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad where plaintiff has previously amended). Appellees’ motion to take judicial notice, filed September 12, 2014, is granted. 2 14-15711 Kilgore’s “Motion Requesting Order Directing Clerk of the District Court to Produce Record of Proceedings,” filed December 31, 2014, is denied as unnecessary. AFFIRMED. 3 14-15711
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
