Susan A. Gonzales v. Gwen Gleason Rohrer

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SUSAN A. GONZALES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

GWEN GLEASON ROHRER,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 19-55391

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00241-GPC-KSC

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Gonzalo P. Curiel, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020
**

Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
We grant Gonzales’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
Susan A. Gonzales appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her action alleging medical malpractice. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for lack of subject

*
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

APR 16 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 19-55391
matter jurisdiction. Crum v. Circus Circus Enters., 231 F.3d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir.
2000). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Gonzales’s action for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction because Gonzales failed to allege a federal claim or diversity of
citizenship in her complaint. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a); Rivet v. Regions
Bank of La., 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998) (plaintiff must present a federal question on
the face of a properly pleaded complaint).
We do not consider documents and facts not presented to the district court.
See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts
not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).
AFFIRMED.