Tony Appleby v. Johnson and Johnson Corporation
Tony Appleby v. Johnson and Johnson Corporation
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 21 2023 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TONY APPLEBY, No. 22-55800
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:21-cv-07109-CJC-ADS
v. MEMORANDUM* JOHNSON & JOHNSON, official capacity; JOHNSON AND JOHNSON PHARMACEUTICAL, official capacity,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 12, 2023**
Before: CANBY, CALLAHAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Tony Appleby appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional
claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
* 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). district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Appleby’s action because Appleby
failed to allege facts in his amended complaint sufficient to show that defendants
were acting under color of state law when they allegedly violated Appleby’s
constitutional rights. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (“To state a claim
under § 1983, a plaintiff must . . . show that the alleged deprivation was committed
by a person acting under color of state law.”); Simmons v. Sacramento County
Super. Ct., 318 F.3d 1156, 1161 (9th Cir. 2003) (conclusory allegations are
insufficient to establish a party was a state actor for purposes of § 1983).
AFFIRMED.
2 22-55800
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished