Brian E. Finander; Marlene R. Finander v. County of Riverside;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BRIAN E. FINANDER; MARLENE R.
FINANDER,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-55856
D.C. No. 5:20-cv-00449-JVS-GJS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Brian E. Finander and Marlene R. Finander appeal pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing their 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 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
* 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 29 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-55856
Colony Cove Props., LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955 (9th Cir. 2011).
We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against the Superior
Court of California, County of Riverside, as barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
See Greater L.A. Council on Deafness, Inc. v. Zolin, 812 F.2d 1103, 1110 (9th Cir.
1987), superseded by statute on other grounds (a suit against a California superior
court is a suit against the state, which is barred by Eleventh Amendment
immunity).
The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ claim against the County of
Riverside because plaintiffs failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible
claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (a plaintiff must present
factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --