Rob Handy v. Lane County

MEMORANDUM

Rob Handy and Brian McCall appeal from the district court’s dismissal of their complaint without leave to amend. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Handy’s and McCall’s claims under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(1), respectively. As to Handy’s First Amendment retaliation claim, the complaint fails to allege facts that tend to show the nature of Handy’s allegedly protected speech or sufficiently plead the “substantial causal relationship” element of his First Amendment retaliation claim. Blair v. Bethel Sch. Dist., 608 F.3d 540, 543 (9th Cir.2010). As to Handy’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim, the complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to plead such a claim. See Bd. of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). Likewise, the complaint does not contain factual allegations sufficient to plead municipal liability for constitutional violations under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978).

As to McCall’s claims, McCall lacks Article III…