Janetta Sconiers v. Mario Santos , 399 F. App'x 219 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 06 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JANETTA SCONIERS and No. 09-15601
TIYEONDREA MCGLOTHIN,
D.C. No. 1:08-cv-01290-LJO-GSA
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v. MEMORANDUM *
MARIO SANTOS, in his individual and
official capacity; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Janetta Sconiers and Tiyeondrea McGlothin appeal pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) their 42 U.S.C. § 1983action arising from their eviction from low income housing. We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d
1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order).
We affirm the dismissal of the action for failure to state a claim for the
reasons provided in the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation entered
on December 8, 2008, and adopted by the district court on February 26, 2009.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiffs leave to
amend their complaint. See Gardner v. Martino, 563 F.3d 981, 990 (9th Cir. 2009)
(“A district court does not err in denying leave to amend where the amendment
would be futile.”).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiffs’ motion
for appointment of counsel because they failed to demonstrate “exceptional
circumstances.” Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir. 1991).
The remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
2 09-15601