enforced § 12-913 and § 12-915 of the traffic code, which King contends permitted him to park his scooter on the sidewalk. Even if King’s interpretation of these provisions were correct, violations of state or municipal law do not, standing alone, necessarily state constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See McMullen v. Maple Shade Twp., 643 F.3d 96, 99-100 (3d Cir. 2011). “To state a claim under. § 1983 for deprivation of procedural due process rights, a plaintiff must allege that (1) he was deprived of an individual interest that is encompassed within the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of ‘life, liberty, or property,’ and (2) the procedures available to him did not p 0 (6th Cir. 1988). See also Kovler v. Bureau of Admin. Adjudication, 6 A.3d 1060, 1062-64 (Pa. Commw. 2010) (<HOLDING>). Appellees’ allegedly incorrect reading or
holding that philadelphias procedures for adjudicating parking violations satisfy the due process requirements of both the united states and the pennsylvania constitutions holding chicagos system for adjudicating parking violations satisfied due process holding columbuss procedures for adjudicating parking violations did not contravene due process holding california postdeprivation recovery procedures satisfy due process despite lack of notice to claimant of recovery procedures holding that prosecution of defendant in the united states for hostage taking based on acts committed outside the united states did not violate due process