Arthur Ezor v. Jim McDonnell

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 21, 202221-55117California493 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 21 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

A. EDWARD EZOR, No. 21-55117

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-08851-JVS-AGR

v.

MEMORANDUM*

JIM McDONNELL; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

JAMES V. SELNA; ALICIA G.

ROSENBERG,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2022**

Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

A. Edward Ezor appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal and state law claims. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Engebretson v.

Mahoney, 724 F.3d 1034, 1037 (9th Cir. 2013) (dismissal on the basis…

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.