JONES v. BROUWERS (2021)

MEMORANDUM **

David Daryl Jones appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 2000a action alleging discrimination by a car dealership. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) or (b)(6). Colony Cove Props., LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Jones's action because Jones only seeks damages, and damages are not available for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 2000a et seq. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000a–3; Newman v. Piggie Park Enters., Inc., 390 U.S. 400, 402, 88 S.Ct. 964, 19 L.Ed.2d 1263 (1968) (“When a plaintiff brings an action under [Title II], he cannot recover damages.”).

AFFIRMED.