Opinion
20-16962
06-30-2021
MARTIN MORENO RUIZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MIGUEL MARQUEZ MARQUEZ, Guanajuato State Governor; et al., 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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 Arizona D.C. No. 2:20-cv-01094-DWL-ESW Dominic Lanza, District Judge, Presiding
Before: SILVERMAN, WATFORD, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM [*]
Martin Moreno Ruiz appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. Team Equip., Inc., 741 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Ruiz's action because Ruiz failed to satisfy his burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction. See Ashoff v. City of Ukiah, 130 F.3d 409, 410 (9th Cir. 1997) (the plaintiff has the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) ("If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action."); Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004) (the court is obligated to consider sua sponte whether it has subject matter jurisdiction).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Ruiz's motion for reconsideration because Ruiz failed to establish any basis for such relief. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth standard of review and grounds for reconsideration).
We reject as without merit Ruiz's contention that the district court engaged in misconduct.
AFFIRMED.
[*] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.