Carl Thompson v. MARJORIE K. ALLARD, Judge

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARL THOMPSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MARJORIE K. ALLARD, Judge; Chief
Judge of the Alaska Court of Appeals;
TRACEY WOLLENBERG, Judge; Judge of
the Alaska Court of Appeals; TIMOTHY W.
TERRELL, Judge; Judge Sitting by
Designation on the Alaska Court of Appeals,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 22-35892
D.C. No. 3:22-cv-00075-SLG-KFR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Sharon L. Gleason, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2023**
Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.
Alaska state prisoner Carl Thompson appeals pro se from the district court’s
judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging claims arising out of
* 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).
FILED
AUG 30 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-35892
state court proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes,
213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Thompson’s action because it was a
forbidden de facto appeal of a prior state court judgment. See Noel v. Hall, 341
F.3d 1148, 1163 (9th Cir. 2003) (discussing the Rooker-Feldman doctrine).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing without leave to
amend because amendment would be futile. See Cervantes v. Countrywide Home
Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth standard for review
and explaining that leave to amend may be denied where amendment would be
futile).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --