Case Name: Christopher Anthony JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rochelle L. NELSON; Regina L. Floyd; Cathy Scott; Greg Jolly; City of Las Vegas Nevada; Las Vegas Metro Police Dept., Defendants-Appellees, and Sprint Telephone Inc.; the Las Vegas Review Journal; the Las Vegas Sun Newspaper, Inc.; Patricia Lynch, Reno City Attorney; Jane Doe # 1; Jane Doe # 2; John Doe # 1; John Doe # 2, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-03-26
Citations: 10 F. App'x 475
Docket Number: No. 00-16742; D.C. No. CV-00-00783-PMP/LRL
Parties: Christopher Anthony JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rochelle L. NELSON; Regina L. Floyd; Cathy Scott; Greg Jolly; City of Las Vegas Nevada; Las Vegas Metro Police Dept., Defendants-Appellees, and Sprint Telephone Inc.; the Las Vegas Review Journal; the Las Vegas Sun Newspaper, Inc.; Patricia Lynch, Reno City Attorney; Jane Doe # 1; Jane Doe # 2; John Doe # 1; John Doe # 2, Defendants.
Judges: Before WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 475–476

Head Matter:
Christopher Anthony JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rochelle L. NELSON; Regina L. Floyd; Cathy Scott; Greg Jolly; City of Las Vegas Nevada; Las Vegas Metro Police Dept., Defendants-Appellees, and Sprint Telephone Inc.; the Las Vegas Review Journal; the Las Vegas Sun Newspaper, Inc.; Patricia Lynch, Reno City Attorney; Jane Doe # 1; Jane Doe # 2; John Doe # 1; John Doe # 2, Defendants.
No. 00-16742.
D.C. No. CV-00-00783-PMP/LRL.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 12, 2001.
Decided March 26, 2001.
Before WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Christopher Anthony Jones, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's judgment dismissing on the pleadings his removed action alleging that defendants conspired to deny him his civil rights with respect to a 9-1-1 call that his fiancee made before he fatally shot her. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's dismissal on the pleadings, McGann v. Ernst & Young, 102 F.3d 390, 392 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.
We agree with the district court that Jones' complaint is time-barred because he failed to file it within two years of the 1995 events at issue. See Perez v. Seevers, 869 F.2d 425, 426 (9th Cir.1989) (per curiam). Jones' contentions that equitable tolling should apply or that Cathy Scott should not have been dismissed as a defendant are not persuasive.
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.