Gonzalez

Gonzalez v. Lira

Good Law
42 F. App'x 995
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 22, 2002No. 01-56355California248 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Mary Sue Gonzalez appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of her action against the United States of America and three employees of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts alleging civil rights violations under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) and related state tort claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, TwoRivers v. Lewis, 174 F.3d 987, 991 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm.

The district court properly denied Gonzalez’s civil rights claims because the Civil Service Reform Act (“CSRA”) precludes Bivens actions for money damages brought by judicial employees for alleged constitutional violations in the workplace. See Blankenship v. McDonald, 176 F.3d 1192, 1194-95 (9th Cir.1999); see also Orsay v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 289 F.3d 1125 , 1128-29 (9th Cir.2002) (holding the CSRA preempts federal claims that fall within its scope even when the statute provides no alternative remedy). Gonzalez’s state law claims are also preempted by the CSRA. See Blankenship, 176 F.3d at 1196…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.