Shane D. Willis v. City of Salem, Oregon;

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
SHANE D. WILLIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY OF SALEM, OREGON; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-35314
D.C. No. 3:08-cv-01510-HA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2012**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Oregon state prisoner Shane D. Willis appeals pro se from the district court’s
judgment dismissing as time-barred his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint alleging
constitutional violations arising from a traffic stop. We have jurisdiction under 28
FILED
MAY 25 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-35314 2
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th
Cir. 2009), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Willis’s action as time-barred. See Or.
Rev. Stat. § 12.110(1) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims);
Douglas, 567 F.3d at 1109 (for § 1983 claims, courts apply the forum state’s
statute of limitations for personal injury claims); see also Wallace v. Kato, 549
U.S. 384, 391 (2007) (“The cause of action accrues even though the full extent of
the injury is not then known or predictable.” (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
Willis’s remaining contentions, including those contained in his letter
received on August 29, 2011, are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --