Marina Read v. Denise De Bellefeuille

MEMORANDUM

Marina Read appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine over Read’s claims which amounted to a forbidden “de facto appeal” of a state court judgment and raised claims that were “inextricably intertwined” with that state court judgment. Id. at 1163-65 (discussing Rooker-Feldman doctrine); see also Henrichs v. Valley View Dev., 474 F.3d 609 , 616 (9th Cir.2007) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred plaintiffs claim because alleged legal injuries arose from the “state court’s purportedly erroneous judgment” and the relief sought “would require the district court to determine that the state court’s decision was wrong and thus void”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Read’s action without leave to amend because Read cannot correct the defects in her complaint. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122,…