N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
NEVADA ASSOC IATION OF C OUNTIES; e t a l., Plaintiffs - Appe lla nts,
v. UNITED STATES DEPARTM ENT OF THE INTERIOR ; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s, AM E R IC AN W ILD HOR SE PR ESER VATION C AM PAIGN; e t a l., Interve nor-De fe nda nts - Appe lle e s No. 15-15620 D.C . No. 3:13-c v-00712-M M DW GC
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ne v a da M iranda M . Du, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d M arc h 14, 2017 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia 

# F IL ED APR 03 2017 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 e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).B e fore : WALLAC E, M c KEOW N, a nd B Y B EE, C irc uit Judge s. Ne va da Assoc iation of C ountie s, Ne va da Farm B ure a u Fe de ration, Ne va da B ighorns Unlim

ite d, a nd C rawford C attle (c olle c tive ly , NAC O) a ppe a l from

the distric t c o urt’ s judgm e nt of dismissa l of the ir a c t ion ba se d on Administra tive Proc e d ure Ac t (APA) a

nd Fifth Am e ndm e nt due proc e s s c la i m s. W e have jurisdic tion pursua

nt to 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a

nd we a ffirm
. The distric t c ourt dismisse d NAC O’ s APA c l a im s for la c k of subje c t m atte r jurisdic tion. W e re vie w suc h a dism issa l de novo. ON

RC Ac tion v . Bure au of Land Mgmt. , 150 F.3d 1132, 1135 (9th C ir. 1998). Thedistric t c ourt’ s c onc lusion tha t NAC O fa ile d to sta

te a due proc e ss c la im

is a l so re vie we d de novo. Butte r fie ld v
. Bail , 120 F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th C ir. 1997). The distric t c ourt did not err in dismissing NAC O’ s APA c la im s. Fe de ra l
c ourts la c k jurisdic tion ove r an APA c la im that “ doe s not c h a l le nge fina l a ge nc y a c tion.” W

ild Fish C onse rv anc y v . J e w e ll , 730 F.3d 791, 802 (9th C ir. 2013). He re , NAC O ha s fa ile d

to ide ntify

a spe c ific fina l a ge nc y

a c tion, se e Lujan v . N

at’l W ildlife Fe d’n , 497 U.S. 871, 882 (1990), or disc re te a c tion unla

wfully withhe ld,
se e N orton v . S. Utah W

ilde rne ss All. , 542 U.S. 55, 62–64 (2004) [he re i na fte r SUW A ] , tha t a lle ge d l y

ha rm e d it. Inste a d, NAC O se e ks judic ia l ove rsight a nd dire c tion of virtually the e ntire fe de ra l wild horsean d burro m a n a g e m e nt progra

m 2in Ne va da . This sort of progra m m atic c ha lle nge is fore c lose d unde r the APA. Se e SUW A , 542 U.S. a

t 66–67; Lujan , 497 U.S. a t 892–94. Dism issa l of NAC O’ s due proc e ss c la im s for fa ilure to sta te a c la im wa s a lso prope r. In its a

m e nde d c o m pla i nt, NAC O a lle ge d only that “ De fe nda nts viola te d the D ue Proc e ss rights of Plaintiffs unde r the Due Proc e ss C la us[e ] of Fifth [sic ] Am e ndm e nt to theC onstitution in tha t De fe nda nts fa ile d to follow the ir own proc e d ure s c onta ine d both in the Ac t a nd in 43 C FR

Part 4700.” This c onc lusory
a sse rtion is wholly

insuffic ie nt to c arry

NAC O’ s burde n

of providing “ a

short a nd pla i n sta te m e nt of the c la im

showing tha

t the ple a de r is e nt itle d to re lie f.” Fe d. R
. C iv. P. 8(a )(2); s e ealso Ashc roft v . Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“ To survivea
m otion to dism

iss, a c om pla int m ust c onta i n suffic ie nt fa c t ua l m atte r, a c c e pte d a s true , to ‘ s tate a

c la im to re l i e f that is pla

usible on its fa c e .’ ” (c ita

tion omitte d)). Nor did the distric t c ourt a

b use its disc re tion by

de ny ing le ave to a

m e n d sinc e NAC O ha d a lre a d

y am e nde d its c om

pla int onc e . Se e Alle n v . C ity of Be v e rly

Hills , 911 F.2d 367, 373 (9th C ir. 1990) (“ The distric t c ourt’ s disc re tion to deny le ave to
am e nd is pa

rtic ula rly broa d whe re pla intiff ha s pre v iously am e nde d the
c om pla i nt.” (c ita

tion omitte d )). AFFIRM E D.

3