Strong
Strong v. Strong
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Douglas Strong, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his action alleging that his estranged wife Amber Allegra Strong conspired with her relatives to kidnap their son and take him to Canada in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985 and 1986, the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 11601-11610 (“ICARA”), and California law. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(ii), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Strong’s section 1985 claims because he did not allege that the defendants conspired against him based upon race or a “class-based animus.” See Portman v. County of Santa Clara, 995 F.2d 898, 909 (9th Cir.1993) (section 1985(2)); Sever v. Alaska Pulp Corp., 978 F.2d 1529, 1536-38 (9th Cir.1992) (section 1985(3)); see also Bonner v. Lewis, 857 F.2d 559, 565 (9th Cir.1988) (“Handicapped individuals are not a suspect class.”).