Case ID: f-appx_429/html/0637-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James SINGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF OAKLAND, CA Municipal Corporation, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 09-17774.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted April 13, 2011.
    
    Filed April 26, 2011.
    George M. Vlazakis, Esquire, Law Offices of George M. Vlazakis, Oakland, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    
      Randolph W. Hall, Esquire, Office of the City Attorney, Christopher Kee, John A. Russo, Esquire, William E. Simmons, Esquire, Jennifer Logue, Jennifer Nicole Matthews, Esquire, Oakland City Attorney’s Office, Oakland, CA, for DefendantAppellee.
    Before: FERNANDEZ and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and WELLS, Senior District Judge.
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. 
        See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Lesley Wells, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

James Singh appeals the district court’s dismissal of his due process suit involving defendant City of Oakland’s lien assessments against his real property, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Under the Tax Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1341, and the decisions in Fair Assessment in Real Estate Ass’n, Inc. v. McNary, 454 U.S. 100, 102 S.Ct. 177, 70 L.Ed.2d 271 (1981), and Patel v. City of San Bernardino, 310 F.3d 1138 (9th Cir.2002), federal subject-matter jurisdiction is lacking where, as here, the state provides a “plain, speedy and efficient remedy” for Mr Singh’s due process claim. Lowe v. Washoe County, 627 F.3d 1151, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2010).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.