IBEABUCHI v. THUMMA (2018)

MEMORANDUM **

Arizona state prisoner Ikemefula Charles Ibeabuchi appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims in connection with Judge Thumma’s rulings in Ibeabuchi’s state court proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Ibeabuchi’s action against Judge Thumma on the basis of absolute judicial immunity because the claims arise out of Judge Thumma’s judicial acts. See Swift v. California, 384 F.3d 1184, 1188 (9th Cir. 2004) (“It is well established that state judges are entitled to absolute immunity for their judicial acts.”); see also 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (barring injunctive relief against a judicial officer “unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable”).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal, see Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009), or documents not presented to the district court, see United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

AFFIRMED.