Eric Dover v. Kathleen Haley, Jd , 616 F. App'x 295 ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 08 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ERIC A. DOVER, MD, No. 13-36183
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:13-cv-01360-BR
v.
MEMORANDUM*
KATHEEN HALEY, JD; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Anna J. Brown, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 25, 2015**
Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Eric A. Dover, MD, appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his constitutional rights were violated
when state officials revoked his medical license. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal based on absolute immunity, Olsen
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
v. Idaho State Bd. of Med., 363 F.3d 916, 922 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the claims against Administrative Law
Judge Barber on the basis of judicial immunity. See Romano v. Bible, 169 F.3d
1182, 1186-87 (9th Cir. 1999) (state officials presiding over hearings entitled to
absolute immunity).
The district court properly dismissed the claims against Kroger and Foote on
the basis of prosecutorial immunity. See Fry v. Melaragno, 939 F.2d 832, 837 (9th
Cir. 1991) (attorneys representing the government in litigation entitled to absolute
immunity).
The district court properly dismissed the claims against the remaining
defendants because the alleged constitutional violations arose from the
performance of functions that “are inherently judicial in nature,” Mishler v. Clift,
191 F.3d 998, 1008 (9th Cir. 1999) (absolute immunity applies to those engaged in
state medical board disciplinary proceeding when they perform actions that “are
judicial or closely associated with the judicial process”), and Dover failed to allege
facts sufficient to show any constitutional violations arising from the performance
of “ministerial” acts, Olsen, 363 F.3d at 929 (absolute immunity does not extend to
ministerial acts).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-36183