Opinion
No. 18-15700
10-26-2018
KYOUNG H. KO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MEGAN J. BRENNAN, United States Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 5:17-cv-06427-HRL MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Howard R. Lloyd, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
Kyoung H. Ko appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing her employment action alleging federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Wood v. City of San Diego, 678 F.3d 1075, 1080 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Ko's action as barred by the settlement agreement because Ko failed to allege facts sufficient to find that the settlement agreement was not enforceable. See Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 951-52 (9th Cir. 2007) (setting forth the factors involved in determining whether an agreement constitutes a waiver of rights); see also Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of Colusa Indian Cmty. v. State of California, 618 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2010) (no discernable difference between California and federal contract law).
The district court's consideration of the settlement agreement in the context of a motion to dismiss was proper because the document was incorporated by reference into the first amended complaint. See United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2003) (district court may consider document incorporated by reference in the complaint "if the plaintiff refers extensively to the document").
AFFIRMED.