Qin Zhang v. Google, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Qin Zhang appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in her action alleging federal and state law violations arising out of prior state court proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Zhang’s federal claims sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because the claims were a forbidden “de facto appeal” of a prior state court judgment or were “inextricably intertwined” with that judgment. See 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 the relief sought “would require the district court to determine that the state court’s decision was wrong and thus void”); Scholastic Entm’t, Inc. v. Fox Entm’t Grp., Inc., 336 F.3d 982 , 985 (9th Cir.2003) (a court may dismiss sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without violating due process).