A. K. Anderson v. Anthem Blue Cross;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
A. K. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ANTHEM BLUE CROSS; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-56172
D.C. No. 5:18-cv-01468-JGB-KES
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Jesus G. Bernal, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
A. K. Anderson appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing
without leave to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the
denial of leave to amend. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d
* 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
AUG 27 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Anderson’s
complaint without leave to amend because further amendment of Anderson’s
claims would be futile. See id. (dismissal without leave to amend is proper if
amendment would be futile); see also Canatella v. Van De Kamp, 486 F.3d 1128,
1132 (9th Cir. 2007) (two-year statute of limitations for § 1983 claims in
California); Jones v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369 (2004) (four-year
statute of limitations for § 1981 claims).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --