United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 00-1585 ___________

Daniel Hanic, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Jeff Bloomberg, Secretary D.O.C.; * District of South Dakota. Douglas Weber, Warden SDSP; * John and Jane Doe, Inmate Account * [UNPUBLISHED] Employees, * * Appellees. * ___________

Submitted: October 19, 2000 Filed: October 24, 2000 ___________

Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

South Dakota inmate Daniel Hanic appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging South Dakota Department of Corrections Policy No. 1B.10. In addition to raising a procedural challenge to the application of the policy to him, Hanic claimed that the policy violated

1 The Honorable John B. Jones, Senior United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. substantive due process and his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures. Having conducted a de novo review, we reject Hanic’s challenge for the reasons explained in the district court’s thorough opinion. See Tillman v. Lebanon County Correctional Facility, 221 F.3d 410, 421-22 (3d Cir. 2000); Parrish v. Mallinger, 133 F.3d 612, 615 (8th Cir. 1998); Mahers v. Halford, 76 F.d 951, 954-56 (8th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1091 (1997).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-