FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RANDY LEE SODERSTROM, No. 09-56976

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 8:08-cv-00309-PA-SS v.

MEMORANDUM * TONY RACKAUCKAS, District Attorney; et al.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Percy Anderson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2010 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Randy Lee Soderstrom, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to state

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. Accordingly, Soderstrom’s request for publication is denied.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). a claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Kirtley v. Rainey, 326 F.3d 1088, 1092 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Soderstrom’s action because Soderstrom failed to state a viable due process claim for access to the DNA evidence at issue. See Dist. Attorney’s Office for the Third Judicial Dist. v. Osborne, 129 S. Ct. 2308, 2320 (2009) (“Federal courts may upset a State’s postconviction relief procedures only if they are fundamentally inadequate to vindicate the substantive rights provided.”).

Soderstrom’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Soderstrom’s request for judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.

2 09-56976