United States v. 2020-12-10 | 19-15393 | GREGORY GOODS V. D. HAMAD | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GREGORY GOODS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

D. HAMAD; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees,

No. 19-15393

D.C. No. 2:14-cv-02580-TLN-KJN

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 2, 2020
**

Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Gregory Goods appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging access-to-courts
claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th

*
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).
FILED

DEC 10 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 19-15393
Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Goods’s action because Goods failed to
allege facts sufficient to show that he suffered an actual injury to a nonfrivolous
legal claim as a result of defendants’ conduct. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343,
348-53 (1996) (access-to-courts claim requires a prisoner to show that defendants’
conduct caused an actual injury to a nonfrivolous legal claim).
We reject as without merit Goods’s contentions regarding judicial bias.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or documents and facts not presented to the district court. See
Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Elias,
921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).
AFFIRMED.