FAREED SEPEHRY-FARD V. STATE OF OREGON, No. 14-17416 (9th Cir. 2016)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 7 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FAREED SEPEHRY-FARD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 14-17416 D.C. No. 5:14-cv-02444-EJD MEMORANDUM* STATE OF OREGON, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Edward J. Davila, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 25, 2016** Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Fareed Sepehry-Fard appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims against the State of Oregon. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal of an action as barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. Micomonaco * 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). v. Washington, 45 F.3d 316, 319 (9th Cir. 1995). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Sepehry-Fard’s action against the State of Oregon on the basis of Eleventh Amendment immunity. See Franceschi v. Schwartz, 57 F.3d 828, 831 (9th Cir. 1995) (Eleventh Amendment bars suits in federal court for damages or injunctive relief against a state or an arm of the state); see also Porter v. Jones, 319 F.3d 483, 491 (9th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing noncognizable claims for retrospective relief, such as damages, from generally cognizable claims for prospective relief against state officials). In light of our disposition, we do not address the merits of Sepehry-Fard’s claims. Sepehry-Fard’s contentions that the district court violated his right to due process are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 14-17416

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.