N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT C ASSANDR

A C . OLAGUE, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. C OUNTY OF SAC R

AM ENTO; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 13-16882 D.C . No. 2:11-c v-00331-LKKEFB M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of C a lifornia Lawre nc e K. Ka

rlton, Distric t

Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d April 22, 2015 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, B YB EE, a nd C HRISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. C a ssa ndra C . Ola gue a

p pe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dism issing her a c t ion a lle g ing fe de ra l a nd sta te la w viola tions in c onne c tion with c hild c ustody

and visita

tion. W e have jurisdic tion under 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e 

# F IL ED MAY01 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).re vie w de novo a dismissa l for fa ilure to sta te a c la im . K nox v . Dav is , 260 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th C ir. 2001). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d Ola gue ’ s substa ntive due proc e s s c la im pe rta ining to c hild c ustody a s ba rre d by the sta

tute of lim ita

t ions. Se eC a l. C iv. Proc . C ode § 335.1 (two-y e ar sta tute of limita

tions for pe rsona l injury

a c tions); K nox , 260 F.3d a

t 1012-13 (for § 1983 c la im s, fe de ra l c ourts a pply the forum sta te ’ s pe rsona l i njury

sta t ute of limita

tions a n d a pply fe de ra l la wto de te rm i ne a c c rua l; a § 1983 c la im

a c c rue s whe n the pla intiff knows or ha s re a son to know of the i njury tha t form s the ba sis of thea c tion). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d Ola gue ’ s due proc e s s c la im s pe rta ining to visita tion, a nd he r e qua l prote c tion c la i m pe rta ining to c hild c ustody , be c a use Ola gue fa ile d to a lle g e fa c ts suffic ie nt to show tha t a ny sta te a c tor de prive d

he r of visits or inte

ntiona lly disc rim inate d a ga inst he r on the ba sis of ra c e or e thnic ity . Se eC hudac off v
. Univ . Me d

. C t r. of S. N e v . , 649 F.3d 1143, 1149 (9th C ir. 2011) (“ To e s ta blish § 1983 lia

bility , a pla intiff m

ust show both (1) de

priva tion of a right se c ure d by

the C onstitution a

nd la ws of the Unite d State s, a nd (2) tha t the de priva tion wa s c om

m itte d by a pe rson a c ting under c olor of sta te la w.” ); se ealso Ashc roft v . Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to a v o id dismissa l, “ a

c om p l a int m u st

1 3 - 1 6 8 8 2 2c onta in suffic ie nt fa c t ua l m atte r, a c c e pte d a s true , to sta te a c la im to re lie f that is pla u sible on its fa c e ” (inte rna l quota t ion m arks om itte d)). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d Ola gue ’ s § 1983 c la im s a ga inst the C ounty be c a use Ola gue fa ile d to a lle ge fa c ts suffic ie nt to show tha t a c onstitutiona

l viola tion ha d oc c urre d . S

e e J ac k son v . C i ty of Bre me rton , 268 F.3d 646, 653-54 (9th C ir. 2001) (no m

unic i pa lity

lia bility unde r § 1983 where no c o nstitutiona l viola tion ha s oc c urre d). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d Ola gue ’ s § 1986 c la im be c a use Ola gue fa ile d to sta

te a § 1985 c la im . S

e e K arim–Panahi v. Los Ange le s Polic eDe

p’t. , 839 F.2d 621, 626 (9th C ir. 1988) (“ A c la im c an be sta

te d unde r se c tion 1986 only if the c om pla int c onta ins a

va lid c la im

unde r se c t ion 1985.” ); se e also Unite d Bhd. of C arpe nte rs &J

oine r s of Am. v . Sc ott , 463 U.S. 825, 828-29 (1983) (to e sta blish a viola tion of § 1985(3), a

pla intiff m

u st a lle ge a

c onspira c y

m otiva te d by ra c ia l or othe r c la s s-ba se d a

nim us). W e do not c onside r m atte rs not spe c ific a lly an d distinc tly

ra i se d a nd a rgue d in theope ning brie f, or a

rgum e nts a

n d a lle g ations ra ise d for the first tim e on a ppe a l. Se ePadge tt v . W

right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009) (pe r c uriam ). AFFIRM E D.

1 3 - 1 6 8 8 2 3