Case Name: Kevin KUEMMERLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard KIRKLAND, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-12-27
Citations: 23 F. App'x 838
Docket Number: No. 00-17445; D.C. No. CV-00-00798-HDM
Parties: Kevin KUEMMERLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard KIRKLAND, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 23
Pages: 838–839

Head Matter:
Kevin KUEMMERLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard KIRKLAND, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 00-17445.
D.C. No. CV-00-00798-HDM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 17, 2001 .
Decided Dec. 27, 2001.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TROTT and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Kuemmerlin’s request for oral argument is denied.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Kevin Kuemmerlin appeals the district court's judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his declaratory relief action alleging that defendant Kirk land, as director of the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles ("DMV"), lacked jurisdiction to revoke his driver's license. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's determination of subject matter jurisdiction. Allah v. Superior Court, 871 F.2d 887, 890 (9th Cir.1989). We affirm.
We conclude that, because the claims in Kuemmerlin's complaint are inextricably intertwined with the Nevada Supreme Court's decision, the district court did not err by dismissing Kuemmerlin's action under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. See Worldwide Church of God v. McNair, 805 F.2d 888, 892-93 (9th Cir.1986).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.