Mast

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs William Mast and Michael Felice appeal from the district court’s order dismissing their complaint. We affirm.

Plaintiffs filed an earlier complaint in district court, challenging the constitutionality of certain Washington statutes that govern the taxation of wine. The defendants in that action, the Washington State Liquor Control Board and the Washington State Attorney General, successfully moved to dismiss the case. The district court held (1) that the Tax Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1341 , divested it of subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ chal *787 lenges to some of the statutes, (2) that Plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge other statutes as to which the Tax Injunction Act did not apply, and (3) that the court had not acquired personal jurisdiction because Plaintiffs had served process defectively. Plaintiffs did not appeal, even though there was a separate judgment stating that “a decision has been rendered” and granting dismissal of the action, and even though a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is a final, appealable order. 28 U.S.C. § 1291 ; McGuckin v. Smith, 974 F.2d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir.1992), overruled on other grounds by WMX…