From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Siegel v. Bradstreet

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 29, 2009
360 F. App'x 832 (9th Cir. 2009)

Opinion

No. 08-56991.

Submitted December 15, 2009.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed December 29, 2009.

Rick Siegel, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

David Lee Gurley, California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, Los Angeles, CA, Robert N. Villalovos, Staff, California Department of Industrial Relations, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:08-cv-O2480-CAS-SS.

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Rick Siegel appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for injunctive and declaratory relief against the California Labor Commissioner. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis v. Cal. Bd. of Psychology, 228 F.3d 1043, 1049 (9th Cir. 2000). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Ove v. Gwinn, 264 F.3d 817, 821 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The district court resolved Siegel's claims on two grounds, one of which was on the merits. We affirm on that ground for the reasons stated by the district court. To the extent Siegel's equal protection claim is based on the differences between the Talent Agencies Act and statutes regulating other occupational licenses, the claim fails because there is a rational basis for the California legislature's decision to craft the Act differently from other licensing statutes. See Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis, 228 F.3d at 1050-53 (rejecting equal protection challenge to California licensing scheme under rational basis test and stating that "[i]t simply is not the function of the courts to tell California how to craft its legislation").

Because Siegel does not state a claim under section 1983, his claim for declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 fails. See Hoeck v. City of Portland, 57 F.3d 781, 787 (9th Cir. 1995).

Siegel's remaining contentions are unavailing.

We deny Siegel's request for judicial notice, and we deny as moot his motion to expedite this appeal.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Siegel v. Bradstreet

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 29, 2009
360 F. App'x 832 (9th Cir. 2009)
Case details for

Siegel v. Bradstreet

Case Details

Full title:Rick SIEGEL, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Angela M. BRADSTREET…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 29, 2009

Citations

360 F. App'x 832 (9th Cir. 2009)