Jenan
Jenan v. Erwin
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*868 MEMORANDUM **
Roger Lewis Jenan appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging that the defendants violated his patent rights in real property by conducting a non-judicial foreclosure of a deed of trust in the property and subsequently pursuing an unlawful detainer action in state court. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Bianchi v. Rylaarsdam, 334 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Jenan’s claims involving a federal land patent. See Virgin v. County of San Luis Obispo, 201 F.3d 1141, 1143 (9th Cir.2000) (per curiam). The district court also properly found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Jenan’s constitutional claims pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine as those claims are “inextricably intertwined” with review of a state court decision on issues which were fully and fairly litigated in that forum. See Doe & Assocs. Law Offices v. Napolitano, 252 F.3d 1026 ,1029 (9th Cir.2001).