MEMORANDUM **

James H. Takechi, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a due process claim in connection with his re-validation as an associate of a prison gang. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Bruce v. Ylst, 351 F.3d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Takechi failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he did not receive the process he was due, or as to whether his re-validation was not supported by “some evidence.” See Castro v. Terhune, 712 F.3d 1304, 1307, 1314-15 (9th Cir. 2013) (discussing the “some evidence” requirement); Bruce, 351 F.3d at 1287-88 (explaining the due process requirements for gang validation in the prison context).

We reject as without merit Takechi’s contentions regarding contraband watch allegations in the operative complaint.

Takechi’s request for a list of district court documents, filed on October 3, 2014, is denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.