Opinion
22-16970
08-21-2023
GARY A. CORDERY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HAWAII SUPREME COURT; MARK E. RECKTENWALD; HOLLY T. SHIKADA, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Attorney General for the State of Hawaii, Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii D.C. No. 1:22-cv-00439-HG-KJM, Helen W. Gillmor, District Judge, Presiding
Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM
Gary A. Cordery appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising out of his state court case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Seismic Reservoir 2020, Inc. v. Paulsson, 785 F.3d 330, 333 (9th Cir. 2015) (dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)); Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) (dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine). We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because Cordery's action is a "forbidden de facto appeal" of a state court judgment and raises claims that are "inextricably intertwined" with that judgment. See Noel, 341 F.3d at 1158, 1163 (discussing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine); see also Cooper v. Ramos, 704 F.3d 772, 779 (9th Cir. 2012) (explaining that claims are "inextricably intertwined" 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.