Jacob Roginsky appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Because Roginsky seeks to overturn final state court judgments against him, the district court lacked jurisdiction over his complaint. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 486, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983) (stating that the Rooker-Feldman abstention doctrine establishes that a district court lacks jurisdiction over a litigant’s challenge to a state court decision, including challenges alleging the state court’s action was unconstitutional). Thus, we affirm the district court’s judgment on those grounds. Additionally, we deny Roginsk/s motion to appoint counsel for Blake. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED