Sepehry-Fard v. Bank of New York Mellon, N.A.

Good Law
588 F. App'x 685
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 201413-15307California343 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Fareed Sepehry-Fard appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising out of his mortgage loans. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir.2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Sepehry-Fard’s §§ 1983 and 1985 claims because Sepehry-Fard failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants acted under color of state law. See Anderson v. Warner, 451 F.3d 1063, 1067 (9th Cir.2006) (to state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person “acting under color of state law” committed the conduct at issue); Caldeira v. County of Kauai, 866 F.2d 1175, 1182 (9th Cir.1989) (absence of § 1983 deprivation precludes a § 1985 conspiracy claim predicated on same allegations); see also Apao v. Bank of N.Y., 324 F.3d 1091 , 1094-95 (9th Cir.2003) (nonjudicial foreclosure was not state action and therefore did not implicate due process). The court did not abuse its discretion by denying leave…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.