Brian Kerry O’keefe v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Las Vegas, Nevada;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BRIAN KERRY O’KEEFE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Las
Vegas, Nevada; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-16418
D.C. No. 3:18-cv-00100-RCJ-WGC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Brian Kerry O’Keefe appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named
Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging
constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de
* 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).
FILED
MAR 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-16418
novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim.
Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed O’Keefe’s action because defendants
are entitled to judicial and quasi-judicial immunity. See Duvall v. County of
Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1133 (9th Cir. 2001) (discussing judicial immunity, factors
relevant to whether an act is judicial in nature, and extension of judicial immunity
to officials other than judges “who perform functions closely associated with the
judicial process” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Mullis v. U.S.
Bankr. Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1394 (9th Cir. 1987) (“The judicial or quasi-judicial
immunity available to federal officers is not limited to immunity from damages,
but extends to actions for declaratory, injunctive and other equitable relief.”).
We treat O’Keefe’s “motion for leave to file memorandum of points and
authorities” (Docket Entry No. 7) as a motion to supplement the opening brief, and
grant the motion. O’Keefe’s memorandum of points and authorities included with
his motion has been filed.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --