Court Opinion

ID: 9892328
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-23 17:01:00.11624+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:31.177222
License: Public Domain

FILED
                           NOT FOR PUBLICATION
                                                                            OCT 23 2023
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                          U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TANISHIA HUBBARD,                                No.   21-16408

              Plaintiff-Appellant,               D.C. No.
                                                 2:20-cv-00670-KJM-JDP
 v.

SERVICE EMPLOYEES                                MEMORANDUM*
INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL
2015; et al.,

              Defendants-Appellees.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Eastern District of California
                Kimberly J. Mueller, Chief District Judge, Presiding

                           Submitted October 19, 2023**
                             San Francisco, California

Before: W. FLETCHER, NGUYEN, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

      Appellant Tanishia Hubbard is an in-home supportive services provider in

California. Until late 2019, she paid union dues to Appellee SEIU Local 2015.

      *
             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).
Hubbard brings several federal claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against SEIU Local

2015 and two California state officials, as well as six state-law claims against SEIU

Local 2015. The district court granted Appellees’ motions to dismiss Hubbard’s

federal claims and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over her state law

claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

      1. The § 1983 claims against SEIU Local 2015 fail for lack of state action. See

Belgau v. Inslee, 975 F.3d 940, 946–49 (9th Cir. 2020); Wright v. Serv. Emps. Int’l

Union Loc. 503, 48 F.4th 1112, 1121–25 (9th Cir. 2022).

      2. Hubbard lacks standing to seek prospective relief against the California

officials. Her dues deductions stopped before she filed suit, and the district court did

not err in finding that Hubbard has not shown that future injury is sufficiently likely

to warrant prospective relief.

      AFFIRMED.

                                           2