Ralph Brinkley, Petitioner-appellant, v. Terrance Marren; Robert Gaston; Thomas Leeds; Sylviatentar; Katrinka Brinkley, Respondents-appellees, 139 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 1998)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Ralph Brinkley appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing, on abstention grounds, his action, in which he sought, among other things, removal of his state court action involving the custody and support payments for his minor child.

We review for abuse of discretion a district court's abstention decision. See Coates v. Woods, 819 F.2d 236, 237 (9th Cir. 1987). Under the doctrine of equitable abstention, "federal, courts traditionally decline to exercise jurisdiction in domestic relations cases when the core issue involves the status of parent and child" even when constitutional issues are asserted. See id.; see also Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 504 U.S. 687, 705 (1992) (reaffirming the domestic relations exception of federal court jurisdiction in cases involving child custody decrees). Because the action concerns a child custody dispute involving Brinkley's minor child, we find no abuse of discretion in the district court's dismissal of Brinkley's complaint on abstention grounds.¹  See Coats, 819 F.2d at 237.

AFFIRMED.