Shabnam Dastmalchian; Msb Investment, LLC v. U.s. Department of Justice;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SHABNAM DASTMALCHIAN; MSB
INVESTMENT, LLC,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-56239
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-09072-PSG-JC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Shabnam Dastmalchian appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her action arising from alleged fraud in a federal criminal forfeiture
proceeding. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
* 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). Dastmalchian’s request for
oral argument, set forth in her opening brief, is denied.
FILED
FEB 22 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-56239
district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim. Yagman v. Garcetti, 852 F.3d
859, 863 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Dastmalchian’s action because
Dastmalchian failed to allege facts sufficient to “state a claim that is plausible on
its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted)).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend
because amendment would be futile. See Yagman, 852 F.3d at 863, 867 (setting
forth standard of review and noting that a “district court need not grant leave if it
determines that the pleading could not possibly be cured by the allegation of other
facts” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
To the extent that Dastmalchian appealed on behalf of MSB Investment,
LLC, the entity is unrepresented and not properly before the court. See United
States v. High Country Broad. Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir. 1993) (sole
shareholder may not represent a corporation in federal court); Johns v. County of
San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1997) (a non-attorney “has no authority to
appear as an attorney for others than [herself]” (citation and internal quotation
marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --