Case Name: Larry SYNCLAIR, Sr., individually and as a parent of Larry Synclair, Jr., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF FRESNO; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-14
Citations: 115 F. App'x 395
Docket Number: No. 03-16910
Parties: Larry SYNCLAIR, Sr., individually and as a parent of Larry Synclair, Jr., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF FRESNO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 395–396

Head Matter:
Larry SYNCLAIR, Sr., individually and as a parent of Larry Synclair, Jr., a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF FRESNO; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-16910.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.
Decided Dec. 14, 2004.
William F. Mar, Jr., Esq., Fresno County Counsel, Fresno, CA, for DefendantAppellee.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Larry Synclair Sr. appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that officials of the County of Fresno violated his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Bianchi v. Rylaarsdam, 334 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Synclair's claims based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because to grant him the requested relief, the federal court would have to rule on the constitutionality of the county officials' actions which are "inextricably intertwined" with the validity of a state court order. See Bianchi, 334 F.3d at 898-90.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.