NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 23 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DAVID GETZEN, No. 20-17241

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:20-cv-08066-SRB-DMF v.

MEMORANDUM* JUAN GARCIA ROMERO, Detention Officer,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 14, 2021** Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

David Getzen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Erlin v. United States, 364 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th Cir. 2004) (dismissal on the basis of the statute of

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). limitations); Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Getzen’s action because it is barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations. See Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 927 (9th Cir. 2004) (§ 1983 claims are governed by the forum state’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims); TwoRivers v. Lewis, 174 F.3d 987, 991-92 (9th Cir. 1999) (the statute of limitations for § 1983 claims in Arizona is two years).

Getzen’s motion for default (Docket Entry No. 15) and motion to consolidate (Docket Entry No. 16) are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 20-17241