Unpublished Disposition, 923 F.2d 861 (9th Cir. 1991)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Ronald Callahan appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1989), and affirm.

Frivolous in forma pauperis complaints may be dismissed sua sponte under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Nietzke v. Williams, 109 S. Ct. 1827, 1831 (1989). A frivolous claim is one which lacks an arguable basis in either law or fact. Id. Generally, unless it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies of a complaint cannot be cured by amendment, the district court must give a pro se litigant notice of the deficiencies of the complaint and an opportunity to amend before dismissal. Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448 (9th Cir. 1987).

Callahan contends that he is being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment because the California Department of Corrections classification committee has given him an "R" classification. The "R" classification prevents Callahan from being housed in a less secure prison. Callahan requests the "R" suffix be removed from his custody classification so that he may be transferred to the California Institute for Men at Chino.

A prisoner has no constitutional right to a particular classification status. Hernandez v. Johnston, 833 F.2d 1316, 1318 (9th Cir. 1987). Moreover, a prisoner has no due process right to be housed in the institution of his choice. Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245-49 (1983). Because Callahan's claims have no arguable basis in law or in fact, the district court did not err in dismissing his action as frivolous. See Nietzke, 109 S. Ct. at 1831.

AFFIRMED.