Glenn Carter v. JAY ROBERT INSLEE, Governor;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GLENN CARTER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JAY ROBERT INSLEE, Governor; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-35083
D.C. No. 2:16-cv-01726-RSL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 15, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Washington state prisoner Glenn Carter appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state
law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.
* 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
JUL 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 18-35083
2000), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Carter’s action because his claims fail
to state a plausible claim, or are barred by judicial or quasi-judicial immunity, or
are time-barred. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 681 (2009) (to avoid
dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” and conclusory allegations are
not entitled to be assumed true (citation and internal quotation marks omitted));
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)); Butler v. Nat’l Cmty. Renaissance, 766 F.3d 1191, 1198
(9th Cir. 2014) (§ 1983 claims are subject to the forum state’s statute of limitations
for personal injury claims); see also Wash. Rev. Code § 4.16.080(2) (personal
injury claims are subject to a three-year statute of limitations); Bagley v. CMC Real
Estate Corp., 923 F.2d 758, 761-62 (9th Cir. 1991) (§ 1983 claim accrues when the
plaintiff first learns of the injury giving rise to the claim).
Carter’s contention that Chief District Judge Martinez erred by denying his
objection to the designation of the magistrate judge and contentions regarding the
appearance of judicial impropriety are unpersuasive.

-- 2 of 3 --

3 18-35083
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --