Dillabaugh

MEMORANDUM **

Vernon Wesley Dillabaugh appeals pro se the district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2) dismissal of his action seeking redress under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 U.S.C. § 242 for the denial of justice for children in Thurston County, and alleging false arrest and malicious prosecution. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2). See Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1154 , 119 S.Ct. 1058 , 143 L.Ed.2d 63 (1999). We affirm.

Dillabaugh’s allegations regarding the denial of constitutional rights to children fail to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because he lacks standing, as he is unable to show that he suffered any deprivation of rights secured by the Constitution or federal statutes. See Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dep’t, 839 F.2d 621 , 624 (9th Cir.1988).

Dillabaugh’s allegations relating to 18 U.S.C. § 242 fail to state a claim because 18 U.S.C. § 242 does not provide a basis for civil liability. See Aldabe v. Aldabe, 616 F.2d 1089, 1092 (9th Cir.1980) (per curiam).

Dillabaugh’s claims of false arrest and malicious prosecution…