22-16611•Anthony K. Anderson v. State of Nevada; Charles Thompson
22-16611Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit26 de abr. de 2023
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANTHONY K. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NEVADA; CHARLES
THOMPSON,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 22-16611
D.C. No. 2:22-cv-00127-ART-BNW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Anne R. Traum, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 17, 2023**
Before: CLIFTON, R. NELSON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Anthony K. Anderson appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional
claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Brown
v. Cal. Dep’t of Corr., 554 F.3d 747, 749-50 (9th Cir. 2009) (Eleventh Amendment
* 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
APR 26 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
-- 1 of 2 --
2 22-16611
immunity); Sadoski v. Mosley, 435 F.3d 1076, 1077 n.1 (9th Cir. 2006) (judicial
immunity); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (failure to state a
claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Anderson’s action because defendants
are immune from suit. See Brown, 554 F.3d at 752 (explaining that the State has
Eleventh Amendment immunity); Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1075 (9th
Cir. 1986) (a judge is subject to liability only when “he acts in the clear absence of
all jurisdiction, or performs an act that is not judicial in nature” (citations and
internal quotation marks omitted)).
Anderson’s motions for injunctive relief (Docket Entry No. 3), appointment
of pro bono counsel (Docket Entry No. 4), default judgment (Docket Entry No. 5)
and presentation of forensic evidence (Docket Entry No. 11) are denied.
Anderson’s motion to file an oversized brief (Docket Entry No. 7) is denied
as unnecessary.
AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.