22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T40e,MEMORANDUM ** California state inmate Craig Reginald Rivers appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action seeking to enjoin his ongoing state criminal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Green v. City of Tucson, 255 F.3d 1086, 1093 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. dismissed, 533 U.S. 966 , 122 S.Ct. 4 , 150 L.Ed.2d 787 (2001), and we affirm. The district court properly dismissed Rivers’ action because Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), prohibits federal courts from enjoining pending state criminal prosecutions. See Green, 255 F.3d at 1094-96 (explaining Younger abstention doctrine). AFFIRMED. 1 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. . We will not entertain appellant’s request for bail contained in his "Statement” to the court, received February 24, 2003.24:T42e,

MEMORANDUM **

California state inmate Craig Reginald Rivers appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action seeking to enjoin his ongoing state criminal proceedings. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Green v. City of Tucson, 255 F.3d 1086, 1093 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. dismissed, 533 U.S. 966 , 122 S.Ct. 4 , 150 L.Ed.2d 787 (2001), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Rivers’ action because Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971), prohibits federal courts from enjoining pending state criminal prosecutions. See Green, 255 F.3d at 1094-96 (explaining Younger abstention doctrine).

AFFIRMED. 1

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

. We will not entertain appellant’s request for bail contained in his "Statement” to the court, received February 24, 2003.