Case Name: Eshag KAHEN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL, Defendant, and Farmers Insurance Exchange; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-26
Citations: 89 F. App'x 113
Docket Number: No. 03-55970; D.C. No. CV-02-08367-AHM
Parties: Eshag KAHEN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL, Defendant, and Farmers Insurance Exchange; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 89
Pages: 113–113

Head Matter:
Eshag KAHEN; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL, Defendant, and Farmers Insurance Exchange; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-55970.
D.C. No. CV-02-08367-AHM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 17, 2004.
Decided Feb. 26, 2004.
Martin Reiner, Law Offices of Martin Reiner, Beverly Hills, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Calvin E. Davis, Davis & Fox, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Eshag Kahen and Eskander Kahen appeal the district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of their action seeking injunctive relief against a state appellate court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the jurisdictional dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir.2003). We affirm.
Because the Kahens seek relief from a pending state court proceeding, the district court properly dismissed their action pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. See id. at 1163.
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.