McIntyre
McIntyre v. City & County of San Francisco
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Rene McIntyre appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging breach of contract and discrimination in connection with a delayed Southwest Airlines flight. 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 affirm.
The district court properly concluded that McIntyre failed to state a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim because the facts he alleged do not set forth a constitutional deprivation under any cognizable theory. See Duffy v. Riveland, 98 F.3d 447, 456-57 (9th Cir.1996).
The district court properly concluded that McIntyre failed to state a claim pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 , or the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 , because he failed to allege facts demonstrating that he suffered from a qualifying disability, or that defendants discriminated against him on that basis. See id. at 453-55 .
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing McIntyre’s complaint with prejudice because further amendment would have been futile. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir.…