eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 2016-12

Wayne Smith v. Aziz Shariat , 671 F. App'x 667 ( 2016 )


Menu:
 
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        DEC 21 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WAYNE D. SMITH,                                 No. 14-16772
Plaintiff-Appellant,           D.C. No. 2:13-cv-01830-TLN-AC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
AZIZ SHARIAT; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2016**
Before:       WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Wayne D. Smith appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing with prejudice his action alleging federal and state law claims related to
his employment and occupancy at the Camp Chaquita RV park. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Hebbe v. Pliler,
    627 F.3d 338
    , 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Smith’s action because Smith failed to
allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claims, even after Smith was given
opportunities to amend his complaint. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
    556 U.S. 662
    , 678
(2009) (to avoid dismissal, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face); see also
Crumpton v. Gates,
    947 F.2d 1418
    , 1420 (9th Cir. 1991) (setting forth elements of
a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983); Grimmett v. Brown,
    75 F.3d 506
    , 510 (9th Cir.
1996) (setting forth elements of a civil RICO claim); Fobbs v. Holy Cross Health
Sys. Corp.,
    29 F.3d 1439
    , 1447 (9th Cir. 1994) (Title VI requirements).
We reject as without merit Smith’s contention that he was entitled to default
judgment against defendants Gennai and Funk.
AFFIRMED.
2                                      14-16772