TAPIA FIERRO v. BARR (2019)

MEMORANDUM ***

Immigration detainee Jose Luis Tapia-Fierro appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), alleging constitutional claims arising from his unlawful removal in 2001. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Lukovsky v. City & County of San Francisco, 535 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th Cir. 2008) (dismissal on the basis of the statute of limitations); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) ). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Tapia-Fierro’s action as time-barred because Tapia-Fierro filed this action more than two years after his claims accrued. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-542 (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims); Van Strum v. Lawn, 940 F.2d 406, 410 (9th Cir. 1991) (forum state’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims applies in Bivens actions); see also W. Ctr. for Journalism v. Cederquist, 235 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2000) (a Bivens claim accrues when the plaintiff knows, or should know, of the injury which is the basis of the action).

AFFIRMED.