Akan Boyd v. Fire Bureau

Good Law
471 F. App'x 609
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 201210-17941California253 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Akan Boyd appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the federal Administrative Procedure Act (the “APA”) against the City of Oakland, the Oakland Fire Prevention Bureau, and two fire inspectors in their official capacities for charging him a fire inspection fee. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Boyd’s Eighth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendment claims because Boyd failed to allege that his injuries were proximately caused by the defendants’ conduct under an official city policy, custom, practice, or procedure. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 , 690 & n. 55, 98 S.Ct. 2018 , 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978) (setting forth requirements for a § 1983 claim of municipal liability and stating that suits against officers in their official capacity are another way of pleading an action against the entity).

The district court properly dismissed Boyd’s APA claim because Boyd failed to allege that the defendants were, or acted as, federal actors. See Gilliam v. Miller, 973 F.2d 760, 764…

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.