Opinion
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TROTT and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Joseph W. Fairfield appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendants violated his civil rights during a prior state court action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Casumpang v. Int'l Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, Local 142, 269 F.3d 1042, 1054 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.
Despite Fairfield's attempts to present a constitutional claim separate from the merits of the prior state court action, the two are inextricably intertwined. Because federal courts do not have jurisdiction to review state court decisions, we affirm the district court's dismissal of Fairfield's action. See Worldwide Church of God v. McNair, 805 F.2d 888, 890-93 (9th Cir.1986) (citing Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923) and D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983)).
AFFIRMED.