James Nasella, Jr. v. Barona Valley Ranch Resort And
James NASELLA, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BARONA VALLEY RANCH RESORT AND CASINO, Defendant-Appellee
- Area
- other
- Panel
- Edward Leavy (author), Smith, Raymond C. Fisher
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 08 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES NASELLA, JR., No. 13-56108 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:12-cv-02102-BEN- JMA v. BARONA VALLEY RANCH RESORT MEMORANDUM* AND CASINO, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2014** Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
James Nasella, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging breach of a Tribal Compact and a wrongful death claim. 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). questions of subject matter jurisdiction and tribal sovereign immunity, Linneen v. Gila River Indian Cmty., 276 F.3d 489, 492 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Nasella’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because defendant was entitled to tribal sovereign immunity.
See C & L Enters., Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 532 U.S. 411, 418 (2001) (“[T]o relinquish its immunity, a tribe’s waiver must be clear.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Allen v. Gold Country Casino, 464 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th Cir. 2006) (tribal sovereign immunity bars an action brought against a tribal owned and operated casino).
We reject Nasella’s contention that he has standing to bring claims under a tribal compact between California and the tribe.
AFFIRMED.
2 13-56108