Ikemefula Ibeabuchi v. Banicki

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 31 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IKEMEFULA CHARLES IBEABUCHI, No. 18-16309
AKA Charles Ikemefula Ibeabuchi,
D.C. No. 2:17-cv-04577-JAT-JZB
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM*
BANICKI, Officer/ Sheriff’s Deputy B3339
(Unit 4E) at 4th Avenue Jail; VAIL, Jail
Commander/ Supervisor A8985 at 4th
Avenue Jail,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 22, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Ikemefula Charles Ibeabuchi, AKA Charles
Ikemefula Ibeabuchi, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
*
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).
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional violations. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28
U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We
affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Ibeabuchi’s action because Ibeabuchi
failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. See Hebbe v.
Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be
construed liberally, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a
plausible claim for relief); see also Lopez v. Dep’t of Health Servs., 939 F.2d 881,
883 (9th Cir. 1991) (setting forth elements of a § 1983 claim).
We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. See
United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not
presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-16309