eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 2019-08

James Linlor v. William Whetsell ( 2019 )


Menu:
 
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 27 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES LINLOR,                                   No. 18-17206
Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No. 3:18-cv-00096-MMD-
CBC
v.
WILLIAM WHETSELL,                               MEMORANDUM*
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 19, 2019**
Before:      SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
James Linlor appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his
action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of
Narcotics,
    403 U.S. 388
     (1971), against a Transportation Security Administration
supervisor for failure to collect and preserve evidence of an excessive force
*
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).
incident. We have jurisdiction under
    28 U.S.C. § 1291
    . We review de novo.
Ochoa v. J.B. Martin & Sons Farms, Inc.,
    287 F.3d 1182
    , 1187 (9th Cir. 2002).
We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Linlor’s action because Linlor failed to
allege facts sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction over defendant Whetsell.
See Walden v. Fiore,
    571 U.S. 277
    , 283-86 (2014) (discussing the requirements for
specific personal jurisdiction and explaining that “the plaintiff cannot be the only
link between the defendant and the forum”); Schwarzenegger v. Fred Martin
Motor Co.,
    374 F.3d 797
    , 801 (9th Cir. 2004) (requirements for general personal
jurisdiction); see also Gilbert v. DaGrossa,
    756 F.2d 1455
    , 1460 (9th Cir. 1985)
(
    28 U.S.C. § 1391
    (e) “does not apply to actions for money damages brought
against federal officials in their individual capacities”).
Linlor’s requests for publication and transfer to the Eastern District of
Virginia, set forth in the reply brief, are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2                                     18-17206