Oberg

MEMORANDUM **

Lyn Richard Oberg, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000), and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order), and we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed all claims against defendants Nichols and Lutes on grounds of prosecutorial immunity. See Milstein v. Cooley, 257 F.3d 1004, 1008-09 (9th Cir.2001) (explaining that a state prosecutor is immune from a civil suit for damages under § 1983 for activities intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process).

The district court properly dismissed all claims against defendants Stave and Webb, the state public defenders, because Oberg presented no facts demonstrating they were acting under color of state law when they represented him. See Miranda v. Clark County, Nev., 319 F.3d 465, 468 (9th Cir.2003) (holding state public…