NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE

HARRY P. DOMAS, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. WILLIAM H. WILDER, Defendant/Appellee.

No. 1 CA-CV 19-0728 FILED 6-30-2020

Appeal from the Superior Court in Apache County No. S0100CV201900130 The Honorable D. Steve Williams, Judge, Pro Tempore, Retired AFFIRMED

COUNSEL Harry P. Domas, Concho Plaintiff/Appellant William H. Wilder, Concho Defendant/Appellee DOMAS v. WILDER Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig and Judge James B. Morse Jr. joined.

P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 Harry P. Domas appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint for failure to state a claim. We affirm.

¶2 In July 2019, Domas filed a civil complaint against William H.

Wilder alleging violations of A.R.S. section 13-2703 (state criminal false swearing) and 18 U.S.C. section 1621 (federal criminal perjury). Wilder filed a motion to dismiss for improper service and, in the alternative, failure to state a claim. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss, finding Domas failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted.

¶3 We review a trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim de novo. Conklin v. Medtronic, Inc., 245 Ariz. 501, 504 ¶ 7 (2018).

¶4 The trial court dismissed Domas’s complaint because he cited state and federal criminal statutes as the basis for his civil complaint against Wilder. Domas does not cite any legal authority—and we are aware of none—granting him a private right to enforce state and federal criminal statutes against other private individuals. We affirm the trial court’s ruling.

AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AA