Case ID: f-appx_57/html/0347-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Timothy Jonathan LUNDBERG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. Howard MATZ; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-56361.
    D.C. No. CV-02-03550-LGB.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 10, 2003.
    
    Decided March 13, 2003.
    Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Timothy Jonathan Lundberg appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging judicial and government misconduct in criminal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s dismissal de novo. See Hicks v. Small, 69 F.3d 967, 969 (9th Cir.1995). We affirm.

The district court properly held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Lundberg’s federal claims were wholly insubstantial. See Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 537-38, 94 S.Ct. 1372, 39 L.Ed.2d 577 (1974). Lundberg’s arguments regarding absolute judicial immunity are unavailing because the action was dismissed as frivolous, not on immunity grounds.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.