Zarefakis v. Matuska
This text of 210 F. App'x 714 (Zarefakis v. Matuska) 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
John Zarefakis 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, United Dairymen of Arizona v. Veneman, 279 F.3d 1160, 1163 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed this action, because Zarefakis’ “commercial notice” asserts no valid basis for federal jurisdiction. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3); Fiedler v. Clark, 714 F.2d 77, 78-79 (9th Cir.1983) (per curiam) (“a federal court may dismiss sua sponte if jurisdiction is lacking”).
Zarefakis’ remaining contentions lack merit.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit 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
210 F. App'x 714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zarefakis-v-matuska-ca9-2006.