Opinion
No. 11-17396 D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01081-DAD
09-24-2012
THEODORE ANDREWS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. KATHLEEN DICKINSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Dale A. Drozd, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Before: WARDLAW, CLIFTON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Theodore Andrews appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Andrews contends that the district court erred in dismissing his petition for failure to state a cognizable claim. The district court correctly concluded that Andrews's petition challenging his "R" custody designation failed to raise a federally cognizable claim for which habeas relief may be granted. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489 (1973).
AFFIRMED.