Ralph M. Furr, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Carlos D. Romo, Defendant-appellee, 98 F.3d 1345 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 98 F.3d 1345 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted Oct. 7, 1996. *Decided Oct. 10, 1996

Before: BEEZER, KOZINSKI, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

Ralph Furr appeals pro se the district court's Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) (6) dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Dr. Carlos D. Romo, the Assistant Director of the Nevada Equal Rights Commission. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Upon our de novo review, see Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990), we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court's order filed on September 26, 1995.

To the extent that Furr contends that he has stated a cause of action for fraud, we conclude that this contention lacks merit because Furr has failed to state a cognizable section 1983 claim. See Sischo-Nownejad v. Merced Community College Dist., 934 F.2d 1104, 1112 (9th Cir. 1991) (stating that section 1983 limits actions to claims involving deprivation of federal constitutional or statutory rights).

We have considered Furr's remaining contentions and conclude that they are meritless.

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.