Finney

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Jacquelyn Finney appeals the district court’s decision dismissing her action based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and judicial immunity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Thompson v. Davis, 295 F.3d 890, 895 (9th Cir.2002) (per curiam), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 921 , 123 S.Ct. 1570 , 155 L.Ed.2d 311 (2003). We affirm.

The Rooker-Feldman doctrine provides that a federal district court may only exercise original jurisdiction, and thus may not exercise appellate jurisdiction over state court decisions. Doe & Associates Law Offices v. Napolitano, 252 F.3d 1026, 1029 (9th Cir.2001). Ms. Finney argues that the district court did not properly apply Rooker-Feldman because her claim is an “arising under” federal claim under the ADA. The relief she requests, however, clearly indicates that the federal district court could not hear her claim without passing on the merits of the state court’s decision. Ms. Finney requests that the federal district court “assume jurisdiction over this action” and order Judge Nugent to rule in her…