Victoria Giampa v. Bryce Duckworth

MEMORANDUM

Victoria Giampa appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal and state law claims stemming from divorce and custody proceedings, and its order deeming her a vexatious litigant. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim, United States v. Corinthian Colleges, 655 F.3d 984, 991, 995 (9th Cir.2011), and for an abuse of discretion the district court’s vexatious litigant order, De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Giampa’s claims against the judges, court clerks, state agencies, and prosecutors because those defendants are immune from liability. See Van de Kamp v. Goldstein, 555 U.S. 335, 343 , 129 S.Ct. 855 , 172 L.Ed.2d 706 (2009) (prosecutors); Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 355-56 , 98 S.Ct. 1099 , 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (judges); Mullis v. U.S. Bankr. Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1390 (9th Cir.1987) (court clerks); O’Connor v. Nevada, 686 F.2d 749, 750 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (state…