MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Tai Truong appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations in connection with his 2008 parole hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Truong’s action on the basis of mootness because, in light of an amendment to the relevant law before his November 26, 2008 hearing, “there [wa]s no longer a possibility that [he could] obtain relief for his claim.” Foster v. Carson, 347 F.3d 742, 745 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Cal.Penal Code § 3041.5(b)(3) (effective November 5, 2008).

Truong’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.