Stuart

MEMORANDUM **

Robert B. Stuart appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing without prejudice his action alleging causes of action under the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and various California statutes. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s sua sponte dismissal, Omar v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc., 813 F.2d 986 , 991 (9th Cir.1987), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Stuart’s action because his amended complaint did not contain a “short and plain” statement of the claims for relief as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). See Jones v. Cmty. Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646 , 649 (9th Cir.1984). The district court properly denied leave to amend because, given the nature of Stuart’s allegations, amendment would be futile. See id. at 650-51.

AFFIRMED.

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