Le'eldred Palm, Sr. v. Go daddy.com, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Le’Eldred Palm, Sr. appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing his action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim, see Williamson v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 208 F.3d 1144, 1149 (9th Cir.2000), we review for abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend, see Metzler Inv. GMBH v. Corinthian Colls., Inc., 540 F.3d 1049, 1072 (9th Cir.2008), and we review for abuse of discretion the denial of a reconsideration motion, see Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir.1993). We affirm.
Palm attempted to allege claims in connection with agreements with defendant regarding the leasing of numerous internet domain names. The single issue Palm raised in his informal brief to this court is his contention that “my complaint should have been filed as a diversity complaint not a federal question.”
We reject Palm’s contention on appeal because his amended complaint alleged federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , as well as supplemental…