Douglas W. Hysell v. Arnold Schwarzenegger;

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DOUGLAS W. HYSELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 12-16970
D.C. No. 1:10-cv-01233-AWI-
GBC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 14, 2013**
Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Douglas W. Hysell appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging violations of the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo both a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,
FILED
MAY 21 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

12-16970 2
Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order).
We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Hysell’s action because the allegations
in his amended complaint do not set forth facts demonstrating a pattern of
racketeering activity required to state a claim for violations of, or conspiracy to
violate, RICO. See Sanford v. MemberWorks, Inc., 625 F.3d 550, 557 (9th Cir.
2010) (listing elements of a RICO claim under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), and explaining
that, to plead a RICO conspiracy claim under § 1962(d), the plaintiff must first
adequately plead a substantive violation of RICO); see also Silva v. Di Vittorio,
658 F.3d 1090, 1105-06 (9th Cir. 2011) (prisoner’s allegations of alleged
constitutional violations do not qualify as predicate acts to establish a pattern of
racketeering activity for the purposes of a RICO claim).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --