FRANK NUNEZ GARCIA, AKA Fransisco Nunez Contreras II v. United States of America

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANK NUNEZ GARCIA, AKA Fransisco
Nunez Contreras II,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-16372
D.C. No. 2:17-cv-01489-JJT-DKD
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
John J. Tuchi, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Frank Nunez Garcia, AKA Fransisco Nunez
Contreras II, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the interpretation and application of
* 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 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
§ 1915(g). Richey v. Dahne, 807 F.3d 1202, 1206 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Garcia’s action because at the time
Garcia lodged the complaint, he had brought at least three prior cases that qualified
as “strikes,” and he failed to allege that he was “under imminent danger of serious
physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); see also Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d
1047, 1055-57 (9th Cir. 2007) (discussing imminent danger exception).
We do not consider on appeal documents or facts not presented to the district
court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --