Case Name: Jonathan BIRDT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charlie BECK; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-09
Citations: 670 F. App'x 607
Docket Number: No. 12-55115
Parties: Jonathan BIRDT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charlie BECK; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 607–608

Head Matter:
Jonathan BIRDT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charlie BECK; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-55115
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted October 25, 2016
Filed November 09, 2016
Jonathan Birdt, Attorney, Pro Se.
Jennifer Ann Delgado Lehman, Kjehl Thomas Johansen, Attorney, Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office,. Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees CHARLIE BECK, CITY OF LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT.
Edward Hsu, Jennifer Ann Delgado Lehman, Jonathan McCaverty, Los Ange-les, CA, for Defendant-Appellee LEE BACA.
Edward Hsu, Jennifer Ann Delgado Lehman, Jonathan McCaverty, Lana Choi-for, Alexandra Zuiderweg, Los Angeles County Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, Defendant-Appellee LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT.
Paul B. Salvaty, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Amicus Curiae— Pending for BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE, MAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION.
Cameron Robert Cloar, Assistant Counsel, Nixon Peabody LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Amicus Curiae—Pending for LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE.
Before: LEAVY, SILVERMAN, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Jonathan Birdt appeals from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging violations of his Second Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Peruta v. County of San Diego, 824 F.3d 919, 925 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc), and we affirm.
In Peruta v. San Diego, this court, sitting en banc, held that a member of the general public does not have a right under the Second Amendment to carry a concealed firearm in public, and that a state may impose restrictions, including a showing of good cause, on concealed carry. Id. at 939. The San Diego and Yolo County Sheriffs Department policies interpreting the California statutory good cause requirement at issue in Peruta therefore survived a Second Amendment challenge. See id. For the same reasons, the Los Angeles Police Department's and the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department's policies interpreting the California statutory good cause requirement do not violate the Second Amendment.
The motions by amici curiae for leave to file amici briefs are granted. The Clerk shall file the amici briefs submitted on October 30, 2012 and November 5, 2012. Appellant's motion to submit the case without oral argument, filed on October 30, 2012, is granted.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.