Marco Rocha, a state inmate appearing pro se, appeals from the district court's Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of his entire complaint, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Rocha v. Zavaras, No. 10-cv-01272-PAB-KMT, 2011 WL 805758 (D. Colo. Feb. 28, 2011). Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The court also finds that Plaintiff did not have a protected interest in avoiding placement on Restricted Privileges status as a result of his termination from the TC Program. Rocha v. Zavaras, No. 10-cv-01272-PAB-KMT, 2011 WL 805758, at *2 (D. Colo. Feb. 28, 2011) (plaintiff's placement in the [Restricted Privileges] Unit without a hearing did not support a procedural due process claim where complaint lacked any allegations that RP status imposed atypical and significant hardship in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life); Grady,2012 WL 1044491, at *8 (loss of privileges and automatic reclassification as a result of termination from TC Program did not give rise to a liberty interest).
See Docket No. 70-2 at 7, ¶ IV. E. The Court finds that a loss of these privileges does not create a liberty interest, as they do not create an "atypical and significant hardship on [Mr. Grady] in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life." Sandin, 515 U.S. at 484; see Rocha v. Zavaras, No. 10-cv-01272-PAB-KMT, 2011 WL 805758, at * 2 (D. Colo. Feb. 28, 2011) (plaintiff's placement in the RP Unit without a hearing did not support a procedural due process claim for deprivation of a liberty interest where complaint lacked any allegations that RP status imposed atypical and significant hardship in relation to the ordinary incidents of prison life). Mr. Grady provides no specific evidence concerning the conditions of his confinement in the RP Unit or how his situation was atypical.