MEMORANDUM**

Rene McIntyre appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging breach of contract and discrimination in connection with a delayed Southwest Airlines flight. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, TwoRivers v. Lewis, 174 F.3d 987, 991 (9th Cir. 1999), and affirm.

The district court properly concluded that McIntyre failed to state a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim because the facts he alleged do not set forth a constitutional deprivation under any cognizable theory. See Duffy v. Riveland, 98 F.3d 447, 456-57 (9th Cir. 1996).

The district court properly concluded that McIntyre failed to state a claim pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, or the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, because he failed to allege facts demonstrating that he suffered from a qualifying disability, or that defendants discriminated against him on that basis. See id. at 453-55.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing McIntyre’s complaint with prejudice because further amendment would have been futile. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). The district court properly dismissed McIntyre’s pendent state claims without prejudice. See Acri v. Varian Assocs., Inc., 114 F.3d 999, 1001 (9th Cir. 1997).

AFFIRMED.