Dennis Montgomery v. Michael West

facts are undisputed, our review is de novo. Id. We affirm.

1. The district court correctly concluded that the statute of limitations barred

the Montgomerys’ Bivens claim. While “federal law determines when a Bivens

claim accrues, the law of the forum state determines the statute of limitations for

such a claim.” Papa v. United States, 281 F.3d 1004, 1009 (9th Cir. 2002). To

determine the applicable Bivens statute of limitations, we look to the forum state’s

personal injury statute of limitations. Van Strum v. Lawn, 940 F.2d 406, 409–

(9th Cir. 1991). And the “claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or has reason to

know of the injury.” W. Ctr. for Journalism v. Cederquist, 235 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th

Cir. 2000) (per curiam).

Here, the operative events occurred in March 2006 at the Montgomerys’

property in Nevada. Nevada’s personal injury statute of limitations is two years.

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.190(4)(e); Rosales-Martinez v. Palmer, 753 F.3d 890, 895 (9th

Cir. 2014). The statute of limitations began accruing in March 2006 when the agents

2 raided the Montgomerys’ property, so the statute expired in March 2008. The

Montgomerys filed this Bivens claim on March 11,…