Yeager v. City of San Diego
This text of 310 F. App'x 133 (Yeager v. City of San Diego) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
F. Joe Yeager appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his Third Amended Complaint on numerous grounds. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Campos v. Nail, 940 F.2d 495, 496 (9th Cir.1991), and for failure to state a claim, Outdoor Media Group, Inc. v. City of Beaumont, 506 F.3d 895, 899-900 (9th Cir.2007).
We affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s Order Dismissing Plaintiffs Third Amended Complaint With Prejudice. Yeager’s contentions on appeal are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
310 F. App'x 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yeager-v-city-of-san-diego-ca9-2009.