STEEP HILL LABORATORIES INC v. MOORE (2018)

MEMORANDUM ***

David Harold Moore appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion to strike under California's anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (“anti-SLAPP”) statute in plaintiffs’ diversity action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. See Safari Club Int'l v. Rudolph, 862 F.3d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.

The district court properly denied Moore's special motion to strike plaintiffs’ complaint because the conduct alleged in the complaint did not involve matters of public interest. See Hilton v. Hallmark Cards, 599 F.3d 894, 906-08 (9th Cir. 2010) (discussing various tests adopted by the California intermediate appellate courts for determining whether a defendant's activity involves a matter of public interest protected by California's anti-SLAPP statute); Rivero v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cty. & Mun. Emps., 105 Cal.App.4th 913, 130 Cal.Rptr.2d 81, 90-91 (2003) (dispute between a former supervisor and employees was not a matter of public interest; publications do not turn an otherwise private matter into one of public interest).

Moore's motion to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 23) is denied.

AFFIRMED.