Case ID: f-appx_677/html/0321-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Renee STEPHENS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OREGON DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLES SERVICES DIVISION, (DMV) a Division of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 15-35456
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted January 18, 2017
    
    Filed January 30, 2017
    Renee Stephens, Pro Se
    Dustin Buehler, Denise Gale Fjordbeck, Assistant Attorney General, Oregon Department of Justice, Salem, OR, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Renee Stephens appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a due process claim and a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Stephens’ action against the State of Oregon on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Krainski v. Nev, ex. rel. Bd. of Regents of Nev. Sys. of Higher Educ., 616 F.3d 963, 967 (9th Cir. 2010) (Eleventh Amendment bars suits against the State, its agencies, and state officials sued in their official capacities).

We reject as without merit Stephens’ contention that the district court should have construed his complaint as requesting injunctive relief.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.