Sullivan

Mason v. Sullivan

Good Law
266 F. App'x 609
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 2008No. 06-56629California442 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Mason appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim, the district court’s denial of Mason’s request for leave to amend his complaint, and the district court’s dismissal of Mason’s state law claims for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm.

We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Madison v. Graham, 316 F.3d 867, 869 (9th Cir.2002). Under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), a complaint may be dismissed for failure to state a claim “based on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.” Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1990), as amended. Mason’s complaint was properly dismissed under this standard. Mason’s First Amendment claim fails because Mason did not allege that the college’s campus permit policy was unconstitutional on its face or as applied to him. Without such an allegation, Mason fails to show that he had a First Amendment right in the first instance.

Furthermore, because Mason was violating a presumably constitutional policy, Sullivan’s alleged citizen’s arrest of Mason did not…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.