Summary
holding that Marin's complaint, which alleged that Arizona's application for admission to the bar violates the constitution, was not "ripe" since Marin had never applied for application to the bar
Summary of this case from Marin v. Wells Fargo, N.A.Opinion
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
D.C. No. CV-97-1166-DWH
Editorial Note:This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada David W. Hagen, District Judge, Presiding.
Before TROTT, GRABER, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
John David Geremia appeals pro se orders of the district court granting summary judgment to Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and Detective Ball. Because neither the orders appealed from nor prior orders resolved all claims against all parties, we lack jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and dismiss the appeal. The district court did not resolve the federal claims for declaratory or injunctive relief against Judge Moma. See Gamboa v. Chandler, 101 F.3d 90, 91-92 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc) (lack of appellate jurisdiction non-waivable defect); Mullis v. United States Bankruptcy Court, 828 F.2d 1385, 1391 (9th Cir.1987) (judicial immunity does not bar claims for declaratory or injunctive relief in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action).
DISMISSED.