NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 21 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DWAYNE CORY WALLACE, Jr., No. 23-3929 D.C. No. 2:23-cv-00844-SRB--DMF Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

JODY BRADLEY, Assistant Warden at Saguaro Correctional Center; MICHAEL GAWLIK, Lieutenant, STG at Saguaro Correctional Center; JENNIFER BECHLER, Hawaii Contract Monitor at Saguaro Correctional Center; CHRISTOPHOR LOOMIS, Lieutenant, STG at Saguaro Correctional Center; HOWARD KOMORI; JEANETTE BALTERO,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 17, 2025**

Before: CANBY, R. NELSON, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Dwayne Cory Wallace, Jr., a state prisoner housed in Arizona, appeals pro

se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action

alleging constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v.

Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Wallace’s action because Wallace

failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler,

627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be

construed liberally, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a

plausible claim for relief); see also Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994)

(requirements for an Eighth Amendment violation in the prison context); Brodheim

v. Cry, 584 F.3d 1262, 1269 (9th Cir. 2009) (requirements for a First Amendment

retaliation claim in the prison context).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

All pending requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 23-3929