Borland

From a decree dismissing a bill of complaint, filed by appellants to seek relief against the enforcement of the Medical Practice Act (St. 1913, p. 722, as amended) by appellees, appellants prosecute this appeal.

The bill alleges that the charter of California University of Liberal Physicians, incorporated under the laws of California, confers the powers “To establish and conduct a college of learning for the purpose of teaching the art of healing and other sciences:” and “To prescribe courses of study and to issue certificates conferring degrees of proficiency and literary honors.” It appears from the allegations that‘complainants were graduated from said institution, and were in possession of diplomas from said institution which had been conferred pursuant to the powers mentioned.

It also appears that complainants were, at all times since April 18, 1935, engaged in the practice of naturopathy in Hawthorne, Cal., and were at all times in possession of a license from the city of Hawthorne to carry on their business of *377 naturopathy. That Webster’s Dictionary defines the word “naturopathy” as “a system of physical culture and drugless treatment of disease by methods supposed to…

I concur in dismissal.

The plaintiff’s prayer being to set aside a state court judgment, enjoin its execution, etc., and the prayer after judgment being final as to the issue involved, Noonan v. Nunan, 76 Cal. 44 , 18 P. 98 ; Arrington v. Licsom, 34 Cal. 365 , 94 Am. Dec. 722 , shows all essentials to determine this court’s jurisdiction. The United States District Court is of limited jurisdiction and review of state court judgments is not one of the granted- powers, 28 U.S.C.A. § 371 , and issuance of writs of injunction to stay state court proceedings is prohibited ( 28 U.S.C.A. § 379 ), except when authorized by law in bankruptcy proceedings.

No debatable ground of jurisdictional question is involved.