Wallis

MEMORANDUM **

Dale M. Wallis appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Presiding Superior Court Judge Thomas E. Warriner violated her constitutional rights by withdrawing courtroom facilities in the middle of her jury trial against her former employers. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and dismissal for failure to state a claim, Hicks v. Small, 69 F.3d 967, 969 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.

Plaintiffs claims against the Superior Court of Yolo County are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. See Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 70 , 109 S.Ct. 2304 , 105 L.Ed.2d 45 (1989) (holding that “ ‘arms of the State’ for Eleventh Amendment purposes” are not liable under § 1983); Greater Los Angeles Council on Deafness, Inc. v. Zolin, 812 F.2d 1103, 1110 (9th Cir.1987) (holding that state courts are arms of the state for Eleventh Amendment purposes).

Plaintiffs claims against Yolo County are barred because she seeks to hold the County responsible for the acts of its employee, Judge Warriner. The County cannot be held responsible under section…