Opinion
No. 2:16-cv-1075 CKD P
10-25-2016
JOSEPH GRIMES, Plaintiff, v. LEALI, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 22, 2016, the complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim, and plaintiff was granted thirty days' leave to amend. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff's amended complaint is now before the court for screening. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over all proceedings this action. (ECF No. 5.)
Having reviewed the amended complaint, the undersigned concludes that it fails to cure the defects of the original complaint as discussed in the August 22, 2016 screening order. The violation of state regulations, rules and policies of the CDCR, or other state law, is not sufficient to state a claim for relief under § 1983. To state a claim under § 1983, there must be a deprivation of federal constitutional or statutory rights. See Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976). /////
Further, as to plaintiff's allegations concerning his administrative appeals, inmates have no Constitutional right to a specific prison grievance procedure. See Ramirez v. Galaza, 334 F.3d 850, 860 (9th Cir. 2003), citing Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1988); see also McCoy v. Roe, 509 Fed. Appx. 660, 660 (9th Cir. Feb.19, 2013) (affirming dismissal of claims arising from defendants' handling of prisoner's grievances) (citing Ramirez).
Because it appears that another round of amendment would be futile, the undersigned will dismiss this action for failure to state a claim.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. Dated: October 25, 2016
/s/_________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2 / grim1075.fac