KARIM KAMAL V. TANI CANTIL-SAKAUYE, No. 18-55759 (9th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAR 19 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KARIM CHRISTIAN KAMAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-55759 D.C. No. 2:17-cv-04555-GW-RAO v. MEMORANDUM* TANI CANTIL-SAKAUYE, in official capacity; PATRICIA A. BIGELOW, in official capacity, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 12, 2019** Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Karim Christian Kamal appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of * 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). Article III standing. Lopez v. Candaele, 630 F.3d 775, 784-85 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Kamal’s action because Kamal failed to allege facts sufficient to show an injury in fact. See id. at 785 (elements of Article III standing). Kamal’s motion to augment the record and to take judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 9) is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 18-55759

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.