ARJUNA FERNANDO V. MANU SAREEN, No. 16-15237 (9th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 28 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ARJUNA C. FERNANDO, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 16-15237 D.C. No. 3:15-cv-03039-JD v. MEMORANDUM* MANU SAREEN; et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California James Donato, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 27, 2016** Before: O’SCANNLAIN, CLIFTON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Arjuna C. Fernando appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of personal jurisdiction his action against Danish child welfare officials. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Harris Rutsky & Co. Ins. Servs, Inc. v. Bell & Clements Ltd., 328 F.3d 1122, 1128 (9th Cir. 2003), and we affirm. The district court properly dismissed Fernando’s action for lack of personal jurisdiction because Fernando failed to allege facts sufficient to establish that appellees have “continuous and systematic” contacts with California that “approximate physical presence,” Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin Motor Co., 374 F.3d 797, 801 (9th Cir. 2004) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) (general jurisdiction), or that his claims arose out of or relate to appellees’ forumrelated activities, id. at 802 (specific jurisdiction). Fernando’s June 13, 2016 emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal is denied as moot. Fernando’s May 23, 2016 “notification of a threat to plaintiff-appellant from defendants-appellees” and request for review is denied. Appellees’ June 8, 2016 motion for sanctions under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 38 is denied. Fernando’s June 27, 2016 motion to strike Docket Entry No. 19-2 is granted. The Clerk shall remove Docket Entry No. 19-2 from the docket. AFFIRMED. 2 16-15237

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.