Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8628101
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Woods v. Carey
No. 8628101 · Decided January 18, 2007
No. 8628101·Ninth Circuit · 2007·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
January 18, 2007
Citation
No. 8628101
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and appellant’s response to this court’s order to show cause, indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See Valdez v. Rosenbaum, 302 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (rejecting claim of unlawful restriction on telephone access); Johnson v. California, 207 F.3d 650, 656 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that prisoners are not entitled to a specific rate for their telephone calls, in rejecting claim that prison officials conspired with telephone companies to overcharge inmates). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and appellant’s response to this court’s order to show cause, indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and appellant’s response to this court’s order to show cause, indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
02Rosenbaum, 302 F.3d 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (rejecting claim of unlawful restriction on telephone access); Johnson v.
03California, 207 F.3d 650, 656 (9th Cir.2000) (stating that prisoners are not entitled to a specific rate for their telephone calls, in rejecting claim that prison officials conspired with telephone companies to overcharge inmates).
04This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir.
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** A review of the record, the opening brief, and appellant’s response to this court’s order to show cause, indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Woods v. Carey in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on January 18, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8628101 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.