T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T NE I L M. J OH NS ON , P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. T R UC KE E R I VE R HI GH L AN DS HO A, L L C ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 17737 D . C. N o . 3 : 0 9 - c v - 0 0 5 8 7 - RCJ - LRL ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da R obe rtC l i ve J one s , C hi e f Judge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J anua ry17, 2012 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , T A L L M A N , an dC A L L A H A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. N e i l M . J ohns on appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e ntdi s m i s s i ng hi s a ct i on chal l engi ng vari ou s hom eow ner’ s a ss oci at i on fe es on hi s now -f orec l osed hom e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo a 

# FI LED JAN 25 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 17737 2 d is m is s a l f

o rla c ko f

s ub je c t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n , Ku n t z v. L a m a r C o rp . , 385 F . 3d 1 1 7 7 , 1 1 8 1 n .6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) , an df o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f le a v e to a m e n d , L o

p ezv . Sm ith , 2 0 3 F. 3 d1 1 2 2 , 1 1 3 0 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 0 ) ( e n b an c ) . W e a f f i rm. T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed John son’ s a ct i on for l ac k o f s ubj ec t m a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on. F i r s t , the c ourtl a c ke d di ve r s i tyj ur i s di c t i on be c aus e J ohns on a n ds e v e r a l o f

th e d e f e n d an ts a r e c itiz e n s o f

N e v a d a . Se e Ku n tz , 385 F . 3d a t1181 (r equi ri ng com pl et e di vers i ty of c i t i ze nshi p). S ec on d, the courtl ac ked federa l qu es t i on j uri sdi ct i on because J oh nson ’ s s t at e l aw cl ai m s nei ther i ncl ud ed a f eder al r ig h t o rim m u n itya s a n e s s e n tia l e le m e n t n o rr a is e das ub s tan tia l f e d e r a l is s u e . See P r ov i nc i al

G ov ’ t of M ar i nduque v . P lac e rD om e, I nc . , 582 F . 3d 1083, 1086- 87 (9th C i r. 20 09 ) ( re qu i re m ent s of f eder alqu es t i on j uri sdi ct i on ). T h e d i stri ctco u rtd i dn o tab u se i t s d i scret i o n i n d en yi n g Jo h n so n ’ s req u est f orl e a ve t o a m e nd t o a l l e ge due pr oc e s s , e qua l pr ot e c t i on, orF a i rD e btC ol l e c t i on P r a c tic e s A c t c la im s b e c au s e a m e n d m e n t w o u ldb e f u tile . See T

h em e P ro m o t i o n s, I nc . v . N e w s A m . M

kt g. F SI, 54 6 F . 3d 99 1, 10 10 (9th C i r. 20 08 ). J ohns on’ s r e m a i ni ng c ont e nt i ons , i nc l udi ng r e gar di ng the e xpunge m e ntof the l i s pendens thatJohn son rec orded agai nsta non -party, ar e unp er suas i ve. J o h n s o n ’s p e n d in g m o tio n s , in c lu d in g to c o n s o lid a te th is ap p e a l, ar e d e n ie d . AF F I RME D.