Case ID: f-appx_576/html/0697-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Holmgeir BRYNJOLFSSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE AGENCY LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 12-55648.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 13, 2014.
    
    Filed May 29, 2014.
    Holmgeir Brynjolfsson, Simi Valley, CA, pro se.
    Charlie Lee Hill, Jr., Esquire, Los An-geles Unified School District Office of the General Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Holmgeir Brynjolfsson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) alleging Fourteenth Amendment due process violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity, Cholla Ready Mix, Inc. v. Civish, 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Brynjolfsson’s action against LAUSD on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Belanger v. Madera Unified Sch. Dist., 963 F.2d 248, 251-54 (9th Cir.1992) (a school district is a “state agency” for the purposes of the Eleventh Amendment); see also Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100, 104 S.Ct. 900, 79 L.Ed.2d 67 (1984) (Eleventh Amendment immunity applies to states and their agencies or departments “regardless of the nature of the relief sought”).

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