FRED JACKSON V. M. BITER, No. 21-17026 (9th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 17 2023 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FRED JAY JACKSON, No. Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 21-17026 D.C. No. 1:21-cv-00774-DADBAM v. MEMORANDUM* M. D. BITER, Warden, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 14, 2023** Before: SILVERMAN, SUNG, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Fred Jay Jackson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-tocourts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim. Mangiaracina v. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Penzone, 849 F.3d 1191, 1195 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Jackson’s action because Jackson failed to allege facts sufficient to show that his inability to appear at the summary judgment hearing in his underlying state court case affected the outcome of his case. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-53 (1996) (elements of an access-tocourts claim and actual injury requirement). We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2 21-17026

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.