Hymes

MEMORANDUM **

Rita M. Hymes appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of her Bivens action alleging violation of her constitutional rights stemming from her arrest and detention for failing to comply with a grand jury subpoena to provide handwriting exemplars. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . This court reviews de novo the district court’s decisions on absolute immunity, Fry v. Melaragno, 939 F.2d 832, 835 (9th Cir.1991), and we affirm.

Because Hymes failed to allege facts sufficient to show that Magistrate Judge Fenton acted in clear absence of all jurisdiction or performed non-judicial acts, the district court did not err by determining that he was entitled to absolute judicial immunity. See Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1075-76 (9th Cir.1986) (en banc).

Because the arresting officers were executing a valid court order, the district court did not err by determining that defendants were entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity for the actions mandated by that order. See Coverdell v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 834 F.2d 758 , 764-65 (9th Cir.1987). With respect to the claims that the officers acted improperly regarding the manner in which they…