MEMORANDUM **

Barbara A. Stuart Robinson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. In re Ford Motor *677 Co./Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 264 F.3d 952, 955 (9th Cir. 2001). We review de novo, Peralta v. Hispanic Bus., Inc., 419 F.3d 1064, 1068 (9th Cir. 2005), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the action because the complaint does not allege facts to support federal question or diversity jurisdiction. See id. (“In civil cases, subject matter jurisdiction is generally conferred upon federal district courts either through diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, or federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331.”); see also Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 129 S.Ct. 1262, 1272, 173 L.Ed.2d 206 (2009) (explaining that § 1331 confers jurisdiction over civil actions ‘arising under’ federal law and that an action ‘arises under’ federal law only where the plaintiffs statement of the claim shows that the claim is based on federal law (citations omitted)).

We do not consider issues raised by Robinson for the first time on appeal. See Janes v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 279 F.3d 883, 887-88 (9th Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.