Yan Sui v. Southside Towing

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Yan Sui and Pei-Yu Yang appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that a private towing company and its agents violated plaintiffs’ constitutional rights and federal and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Caviness v. Horizon Cmty. Learning Ctr., Inc., 590 F.3d 806, 811-12 (9th Cir.2010), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims because plaintiffs failed to allege facts in their amended complaint sufficient to show that defendants were acting under color of state law. See id. at 812, 815 (state action is a required element of a § 1983 claim, and mere fact that a private entity performs a function that serves the public does not make its acts state action); Price v. Hawaii, 939 F.2d 702, 707-08 (9th Cir.1991) (private parties do not generally act under color of state law for § 1983 purposes).

The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) because plaintiffs cannot bring a private action under 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a) and plaintiffs failed to allege facts in their amended…