Opinion
22-15281
11-25-2022
CARINA CONERLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. YEE YANG; CAROLINE WENZEL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL; SHARIF ROLDAN TARPIN; JULIE G. YAP; SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT; SACRAMENTO COUNTY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California D.C. No. 2:21-cv-01618-WBS-DB William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and BADE, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
Carina Conerly appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing her action alleging claims federal claims arising from state court custody proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Wolfe v. Strankman, 392 F.3d 358, 362 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Conerly's action because it is a "forbidden de facto appeal" of a state court custody judgment and raises issues that are "inextricably intertwined" with that judgment. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1158, 1163 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine); see also Cooper v. Ramos, 704 F.3d 772, 779 (9th Cir. 2012) (noting claims are "inextricably intertwined" for purposes of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine where "the relief requested in the federal action would effectively reverse the state court decision or void its ruling" (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).