Charles E. McManama v. County of Clackamas

981 F.2d 1258 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Charles E. MCMANAMA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF CLACKAMAS, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-35411 United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 23, 1992. * Decided Dec. 8, 1992. Before SCHROEDER, FLETCHER and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Charles McManama appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 1 3 We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dept., 839 F.2d 621 , 623 (9th Cir.1988). 4 McManama's complaint alleged six causes of action. Even a liberal review of the record in a light most favorable to McManama reveals that each cause of action is directly related to the existence of a valid state court…