NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 4 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DESHAY D. FORD, No. 23-55699

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:22-cv-08339-VBF-RAO

v.

MEMORANDUM*

MICHAEL GREENBERG; MICHAEL

AVILA; GARY LAVIGNA; CALIFORNIA

WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS

BOARD,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Valerie Baker Fairbank, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 29, 2024**

Before: FRIEDLAND, BENNETT, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.

Deshay D. Ford appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims arising from an incident

involving a state agency judge and information officer. We have jurisdiction under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to

state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d

1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Ford’s claims against Judge Greenberg

and Avila on the basis of judicial and quasi-judicial immunity. See In re Castillo,

297 F.3d 940, 948 (9th Cir. 2002) (explaining that individuals who perform

functions that are judicial in nature or who have a sufficiently close nexus to the

adjudicative process are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity); Duvall v. County of

Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1133 (9th Cir. 2001) (describing factors relevant to whether

an act is judicial in nature and subject to absolute judicial immunity).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Ford’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 6) is granted.

Because Ford is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, we instruct the

district court to return the fees collected for this appeal to Ford. The Clerk will

serve this memorandum disposition on the district court clerk and the financial unit

of the district court.

All other pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2