22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T492,MEMORANDUM Eric Leon Christian appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal claims arising out of his incarceration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Christian’s action because Hoye is immune from suit for complying with a facially valid court order. See Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034, 1038 (9th Cir. 2013) (“[Pjublic officials who ministerially enforce facially valid court orders are entitled to absolute immunity.”); Hoffman v. Holden, 268 F.2d 280, 300 (9th Cir. 1959) (the failure to release a prisoner held on a warrant or commitment cannot form the basis of a civil rights action even if “the conviction later set aside”), overruled on other grounds by Cohen v. Norris, 300 F.2d 24 (9th Cir. 1962). Christian’s pending motions are denied. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.24:T4c4,

MEMORANDUM

Eric Leon Christian appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal claims arising out of his incarceration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Christian’s action because Hoye is immune from suit for complying with a facially valid court order. See Engebretson v. Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034, 1038 (9th Cir. 2013) (“[Pjublic officials who ministerially enforce facially valid court orders are entitled to absolute immunity.”); Hoffman v. Holden, 268 F.2d 280, 300 (9th Cir. 1959) (the failure to release a prisoner held on a warrant or commitment cannot form the basis of a civil rights action even if “the conviction later set aside”), overruled on other grounds by Cohen v. Norris, 300 F.2d 24 (9th Cir. 1962).

Christian’s pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.