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 pa ne 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 a r 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 CARM EN E. CAM PB EL L, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. DR. ALEXAN DER S TE I N & BURL , M .D ., D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 10- 57057 D . C . N o . 2 : 1 0 -cv -0 7 1 8 3 -G A F -JC 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 o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia G a ryA . F e e s s , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d J une 26, 2012 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , H A W K IN S , an dG O U L D , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C arm en E . C am pb el l appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ctcourt ’ s order di s m i s s i ng he rm e di c a l m a l pr a c t i c e a c t i on f orl a c k of

s ubj e c tm a tt e rj ur i s di c t i on a nd e nt e r i ng apr e - f

i l i ng or de ra ga i ns the ra s ave xa t i ous l i t i ga nt . W e ha ve 

# FI LED JU L 13 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 57057 2 j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo adi s m i s s a l f orl a c k of s u b 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 ., 3 8 5 F .3 d1 1 7 7 , 1 1 8 1 n .6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) , a n d f

o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n av e x a tio u s litig a n t o r d e r , De L on g v. H enness ey , 9 1 2 F .2 d 1 1 4 4 , 1 1 4 6 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 0 ) . W e a f f irm . T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed C am pb el l ’ s a ct i on for l ac k o f s ubj ec t m a tte rju r is d ic tio n b e c au s e C a m p b e ll’s c la im s a g a in s t th e n a m e dd e f e n d a n t a ll ar ose und erC al i forni a s t at e l aw and she conceded before the di stri ctcourtthat th e r e w a s n o d iv e r s ityo f c itiz e n s h ip . See P rovi nci alG ov’t of M ari nduq ue v. P lac e rD om e, I

nc . , 582 F . 3d 1083, 1086- 87 ( 9th C i r . 2009) ( f e de r a l que s t i on j uri sdi ct i on ar i se s und er28 U . S . C . § 1 33 1 i f afe dera l ri gh tor i m m un i ty i s an e s s e nt i a l e l e m e ntof

pl a i nt i f f’ s c l a i m ori f

s t a t e l a w c l a i m r a i s e s adi s put e d a nd s u b s ta n tia l f

e d e r a l is s u e ) ; Ku n tz , 38 5 F . 3d at11 81 (28 U . S . C . § 1 33 2 requi re s c o m p le te d iv e r s ityo f

c itiz e n s h ip b e tw e e n th e p a rtie s ) ; se e al so R ey no so v. G i ur bi no , 462 F . 3d 1099, 1110 ( 9th C i r . 2006) ( pa rtyi s bound byc onc e s s i on t o the d is tr ic t c o u rt n o tw ith s ta n d in g c o n tr a ryp o s itio n o n ap p e a l) . T he di stri ctcourtdi d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n ent er i ng a narrow l y- t ai l ored vexat i ou s l i t i gantorder a gai nstC am pb el l w i th n ot i ce and o pp ortun i ty t o b e heard base d o n h erhi st ory of f i l i ng si m i l arm er i t l es s a ct i on s a gai nstthe defendantt o try to a v o idth e a d v e r s e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f ap r io rs ta te c o u rt ru lin g . Se e D e L ong , 91210- 57057 3 F .2 d a t 1 1 4 7 - 4 8 ( s e ttin g f o rth f a c to r s f o rth e e n tryo f

ap r e - f ilin g o r d e ra g a in s t a vexat i ou s l i t i gantun der c ou rt ’ s i nh er entautho ri ty t o curb abu si ve l i t i gat i on ). C am pb el l ’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.