BYRON III v. 50 (2021)

MEMORANDUM **

Joseph J. Byron III appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process violations arising from a sales tax assessment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Jerron West, Inc. v. Cal., State Bd. of Equalization, 129 F.3d 1334, 1337 (9th Cir. 1997).

The district court properly dismissed Byron's action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Tax Injunction Act bars taxpayers from challenging the validity of a state tax in federal court where there is an adequate remedy available in state court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1341 (“The district courts shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law where a plain, speedy and efficient remedy may be had in the courts of such State.”); Jerron West, Inc., 129 F.3d at 1338-39 (explaining that California offers a “plain, speedy and efficient remedy” in its courts for state tax appeals (citation omitted)).

AFFIRMED.