MEMORANDUM **

Washington state prisoner Donald Morris Lee appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his “RICO Complaint by a Civilian.” We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), see Howard v. Am. Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 746 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

Although Lee’s action was docketed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, Lee is not seeking habeas relief, as the district court noted. Instead, he alleges a RICO violation premised upon someone allegedly forging a judge’s signature on orders in his state court proceedings. The district court properly dismissed Lee’s action because he failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible RICO claim. See Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co., Inc., 473 U.S. 479, 496, 105 S.Ct. 3275, 87 L.Ed.2d 346 (1985) (elements of RICO claim); Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.