Court Opinion

ID: 9945894
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-28 19:01:29.981536+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:23:16.456986
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 28 2024
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LJUBO SKRBIC,                                   No. 23-35591

                Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No. 2:23-cv-00934-RSM

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH,

                Defendant-Appellee.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Washington
                   Ricardo S. Martinez, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted February 21, 2024**

Before:      FERNANDEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

      Ljubo Skrbic appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing for

improper venue his action alleging various claims related to a property and state

court proceedings in Florida. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

review de novo. Immigrant Assistance Project of the L.A. County Fed’n of Lab.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
(AFL-CIO) v. INS, 306 F.3d 842, 868 (9th Cir. 2002). We affirm.

       The district court properly dismissed Skrbic’s action for improper venue

because Skrbic failed to establish that defendant resides in the Western District of

Washington or that a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to his

claims occurred there. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), (2) (describing where a civil

action may be brought); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) (“A district court of a district

in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss,

or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in

which it could have been brought.”).

       All pending motions are denied.

       AFFIRMED.

                                             2                                      23-35591