NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 21 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DUANE RONALD BELANUS, No. 21-35838

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 6:21-cv-00024-SEH

v.

MEMORANDUM*

STATE OF MONTANA; ATTORNEY

GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF

MONTANA; LEWIS AND CLARK

COUNTY,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 12, 2022**

Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Montana state prisoner Duane Ronald Belanus appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging various constitutional

claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a

* 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). dismissal for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A). Resnick v. Hayes,

213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Belanus’s claims because they are a

“forbidden de facto appeal” of state court proceedings and raise issues that are

“inextricably intertwined” with those proceedings. See Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d

1148, 1158, 1163 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 21-35838