Lafta v. State of Texas

Case: 24-50777 Document: 32-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-50777

Summary Calendar FILED ____________ April 21, 2025 Lyle W. Cayce Ahmad Lafta, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellant, versus

State of Texas; Travis County; Heman Marion Sweatt,

Travis County; Roscoe Properties; Miranda McArthur,

Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:24-CV-527 ______________________________

Before Jolly, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: *

Ahmad Lafta, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a civil rights complaint, relating to a 2016 eviction, against the State of Texas, Travis County, the Heman Marion Sweatt Travis County Courthouse, Roscoe Properties, and Miranda McArthur. The district court dismissed his Case: 24-50777 Document: 32-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2025

No. 24-50777 complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) on the ground that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

On appeal, Lafta argues that the district court improperly dismissed his case without proper notice, without providing him the opportunity to be heard, and without considering any evidence. Lafta altogether fails, however, to brief arguments concerning the district court’s holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Although pro se briefs are afforded liberal construction, even pro se litigants must brief arguments to preserve them. Mapes v. Bishop, 541 F.3d 582, 584 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, Lafta has abandoned any argument that the district court erred in holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, id., and we find no error in the district court’s dismissal of Lafta’s complaint. AFFIRMED.