MEMORANDUM **

Charles James Chatman, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A on statute of limitations grounds. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Jones v. Bla-nas, 393 F.3d 918, 926 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Chatman’s claims because they are time-barred. See id. at 927 (explaining that the applicable statute of limitations for § 1983 claims is the forum state’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims, and setting forth California’s statute of limitations); Johnson v. California, 207 F.3d 650, 654 (9th Cir. 2000) (stating that, under California law, the limitations period is tolled for two years for prisoners serving less than a life sentence). Chatman’s contention that the action is not time-barred because he submitted an amended complaint raising the same claims in a prior action is unpersuasive.

Chatman’s requests for judicial notice are denied.

AFFIRMED.