Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02100/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02100-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1331fr Fed. Question: Fraud

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE EVERETT SMITH, JR.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPT. OF 

CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. 17cv2100

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

George Smith Jr. attempted to remove an action by Child Support Services after 

Commissioner Pennie McLaughlin ordered Smith to pay child support. First, removal is 

improper and this Court lacks original jurisdiction. See 28 U.SC. §§ 1441, 46. Second, the

Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars Smith’s de facto appeal asking this Court to resolve issues 

inextricably intertwined with the state court judgment. See, e.g., Ignacio v. Judges of U.S. 

Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit, 453 F.3d 1160, 1166 (9th Cir. 2006); Sanders v. Del 

Fierro, 2012 WL 2390754, at *4 (S.D. Cal. June 2012). Third, the domestic relations 

exception bars this action since Smith’s underlying contention is that he’s not the father and 

shouldn’t have to pay. Buechold v. Ortiz, 401 F.2d 371, 372 (9th Cir. 1968). Finally, even if 

the Court had jurisdiction, defendants are immune. See Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 

1075 (9th Cir. 1986); Govaerts v. Santa Clara Cty. Dep't of Child Support Servs., 2009 WL 

890881, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2009). The case is DISMISSED without leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 6, 2017

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:17-cv-02100-LAB-WVG Document 6 Filed 12/07/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 1