BUCK MOORE V. JORDET, No. 12-35270 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT APR 23 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS BUCK DANIEL MOORE, No. 12-35270 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01376-AC v. MEMORANDUM * JORDET; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 16, 2013 ** Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Oregon state prisoner Buck Daniel Moore appeals pro se from the district court s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations concerning his conditions of confinement. We have jurisdiction under * 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). 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Moore s action because the amended complaint did not contain[] enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) (noting obligation to construe pro se pleadings liberally). Moore s request for appointment of counsel is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 12-35270

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.