Tammy Berdeaux v. SUSAN MANNING, Instructor for the University of Wisconsin-Stout in her official

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TAMMY BERDEAUX,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SUSAN MANNING, Instructor for the
University of Wisconsin-Stout in her
official and individual capacity; NATHAN
KIRKMAN, Judicial Officer for
University of Wisconsin-Stout in his
official and individual capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-15533
D.C. No. 2:08-cv-00554-JWS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
John W. Sedwick, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010**
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Tammy Berdeaux appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
FILED
OCT 06 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-15533 2
dismissing for lack of jurisdiction her action arising from her participation in a
Masters in Education program through the University of Wisconsin-Stout. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Pebble Beach Co.
v. Caddy, 453 F.3d 1151, 1154 (9th Cir. 2006), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the action because Berdeaux failed to
establish that the court had personal jurisdiction over defendants. See
Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 800, 802-03 (9th Cir.
2004) (stating that “the plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating that jurisdiction
is appropriate,” and setting forth test for specific personal jurisdiction).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --