Bankston

MEMORANDUM

Brenda S. Bankston appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 , 1983, and 1985, and state law actions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo a grant of summary judgment. See Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 441 (9th Cir.1995).

Because Vallejo City Unified School District is a state agency, see Belanger v. Madera Unified Sch. Dist., 963 F.2d 248, 254 (9th Cir.1992), and Bankston has not established a waiver of sovereign immunity *818 or consent to suit, the district court did not err by granting Vallejo City Unified School District’s motion to dismiss based on Eleventh Amendment immunity, see Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 99-100 , 104 S.Ct. 900 , 79 L.Ed.2d 67 (1984).

Because Bankston failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the truth of defendants’ proffered reasons for her dismissal, the district court did not err by dismissing her section 1981 and 1983 claims. See Peters v. Lieuallen, 746 F.2d 1390, 1393 (9th Cir.1984).

Because Bankston is a probationary teacher, the district court did nor err by dismissing her due…