THOMAS v. ZELON (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

California attorney Jeffrey Gray Thomas appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal claims related to sanctions entered against Thomas in a state court action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Thomas’s action as barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine because Thomas’s claims stemming from the prior state court action constitute a “de facto appeal” of prior state court judgments, or are “inextricably intertwined” with those judgments. See id. at 1155-57 (the Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars de facto appeals of a state court decision); see also Cooper v. Ramos, 704 F.3d 772, 781-83 (9th Cir. 2012) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars claims where “federal relief can only be predicated upon a conviction that the state court was wrong” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.