Ted Erum, Jr. v. County of Kauai
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Ted Erum, Jr., appeals pro se from the order dismissing his action seeking to prevent defendants from cutting monkeypod trees on land intended for commercial development. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Alvarado v. Table Mt. Rancheria, 509 F.3d 1008, 1015 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Erum’s action because evidence in the record, including Erum’s statements and past behavior, demonstrated that his attempt to amend his complaint to state constitutional violations was solely for the purpose of obtaining federal question subject matter jurisdiction after failing to obtain diversity jurisdiction and his constitutional claim was frivolous and not colorable. See Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 , 513 n. 10, 126 S.Ct. 1235 , 163 L.Ed.2d 1097 (2006).
The district court properly dismissed Erum’s action without leave to amend because amendment of the complaint would be futile. See Orsay v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 289 F.3d 1125 , 1136 (9th Cir.2002); see also Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 831 , 109 S.Ct. 2218 , 104…