Kimothy Maurice Wynn v. State of Washington, doing business as Gregory Greer

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KIMOTHY MAURICE WYNN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, doing
business as Gregory Greer,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 18-35089
D.C. No. 3:17-cv-06012-BHS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2018**
Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Kimothy Maurice Wynn appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing his action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Caroline Cas. Ins. Co. v. Team
Equip., Inc., 741 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.
* 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
MAY 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-35089
The district court properly dismissed Wynn’s complaint because Wynn
failed to provide a basis for subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(h)(3) (authorizing sua sponte dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction);
see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) (complaint must contain a “short and plain statement”
of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction); Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d
1115, 1116 (9th Cir. 2004) (federal court obligated to determine sua sponte
whether it has subject matter jurisdiction).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --