Vernon Risby v. United States

MEMORANDUM

Vernon Wendell Risby appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal claims in connection with the revocation of his security clearance. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010) (dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)); Dorfmont v. Brown, 913 F.2d 1399, 1400-01 (9th Cir. 1990) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Risby’s due process claim because Risby failed to allege facts sufficient to show that he had a protected liberty or property interest in his security clearance. See Dorfmont, 913 F.2d at 1403-04 (no due process claim arising out of revocation of a security clearance because there is no liberty or property interest in a security clearance).

The district court properly dismissed Risby’s claim alleging a violation of Executive Order No. 12968 because it does not create a private right of action. See Exec. Order No. 12968, 60 Fed. Reg. 40245 , § 7.2(e) (Aug. 2, 1995) (“This Executive order is ... not intended to, and does not, create any right to administrative or judicial review,…