Fareed Sepehry-Fard v. State of Oregon

Good Law
670 F. App'x 576
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 201614-17416California192 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Fareed Sepehry-Fard appeals pro se from .the district court’s judgment dismiss ing his action alleging federal and state law claims against the State of Oregon. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal of an action as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. Micomonaco v. Washington, 45 F.3d 316, 319 (9th Cir. 1995). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Sepehry-Fard’s action against the State of Oregon on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Franceschi v. Schwartz, 57 F.3d 828, 831 (9th Cir. 1995) (Eleventh Amendment bars suits in federal court for damages or injunctive relief against a state or an arm of the state); see also Porter v. Jones, 319 F.3d 483, 491 (9th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing non-cognizable claims for retrospective relief, such as damages, from generally cognizable claims for prospective relief against state officials). In light of our disposition, we do not address the merits of Sepehry-Fard’s claims.

Sepehry-Fard’s contentions that the district court violated his right to due process are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as…

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.