Case Name: Paul M. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OREGON EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, being sued as Employment Department; SCS Interactive Inc, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-01-25
Citations: 2 F. App'x 830
Docket Number: No. 00-35411
Parties: Paul M. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OREGON EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, being sued as Employment Department; SCS Interactive Inc, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 2
Pages: 830–831

Head Matter:
Paul M. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OREGON EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, being sued as Employment Department; SCS Interactive Inc, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 00-35411.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 8, 2001 .
Decided Jan. 25, 2001.
Before BEEZER, O’SCANNLAIN, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument, and denies Allen's request for oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Paul H. Allen appeals pro se the district court's final judgment dismissing his action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging constitutional violations arising from the State of Oregon Employment Department's denial of unemployment benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
We review de novo the existence of subject matter jurisdiction. See Allah v. Superior Court, 871 F.2d 887, 890 (9th Cir. 1989).
Because Allen's section 1983 claims are inextricably intertwined with a state court's decision, we conclude that the district court correctly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate his action. See Worldwide Church of God v. McNair, 805 F.2d 888, 892-93 (9th Cir.1986).
Because Allen did not show clear error or present new evidence, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his motion for reconsideration. See School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993).
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 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.