Full text
Ikemefula Ibeabuchi v. Samuel Thumma
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 31 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
IKEMEFULA CHARLES IBEABUCHI, No. 18-15871
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:18-cv-00111-JAT-JZB
v. MEMORANDUM* SAMUEL A. THUMMA,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 22, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Ikemefula Charles Ibeabuchi appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims in connection with Judge Thumma’s rulings in Ibeabuchi’s state court proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review
* 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).
de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Ibeabuchi’s action against Judge Thumma on the basis of absolute judicial immunity because the claims arise out of Judge Thumma’s judicial acts. See Swift v. California, 384 F.3d 1184, 1188 (9th Cir. 2004) (“It is well established that state judges are entitled to absolute immunity for their judicial acts.”); see also 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (barring injunctive relief against a judicial officer “unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable”).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal, see Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009), or documents not presented to the district court, see United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).
AFFIRMED.
Footnotes
[2] 18-15871