-
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 12 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CURTIS LEE MORRISON, No. 19-16555 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-00284-JAM-DB v. MEMORANDUM* E. VIERRA, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 6, 2020** Before: BERZON, N.R. SMITH, and MILLER, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Curtis Lee Morrison appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an equal protection violation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 * 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). F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Morrison’s action because the “class- of-one” theory does not apply in the context of discretionary personnel decisions in public employment. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15 § 3041.1(a) (describing criteria for filling paid inmate work assignments in California prisons); Engquist v. Or. Dep’t of Agr.,
553 U.S. 591, 605-07 (2008) (class-of-one theory of equal protection does not apply to the public employment context). Morrison’s motions for appointment of counsel (Docket Entry Nos. 3 and 10) are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 19-16555
Document Info
Docket Number: 19-16555
Filed Date: 5/12/2020
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 5/12/2020