Janette L. Gordon v. United States Customs and Border Protection

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JANETTE L. GORDON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND
BORDER PROTECTION,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 14-15661
D.C. No. 4:13-cv-02370-DCB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 9, 2015**
Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Janette L. Gordon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in her
action arising from the impounding of her car. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C.
FILED
DEC 17 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998)
(order), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Gordon’s action because the
allegations in Gordon’s complaint failed to state a claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627
F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be liberally
construed, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible
claim for relief). Moreover, to the extent that Gordon sought to bring an action
under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403
U.S. 388 (1971), no Bivens remedy is available against a federal agency. See W.
Radio Servs. Co. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 578 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
14-15661 2

-- 2 of 2 --