FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 21 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
STEPHANIE McGEE, No. 13-16131
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 4:12-cv-03764-YGR
v.
MEMORANDUM*
DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT
SERVICES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
STATE BUREAU OF CHILD SUPPORT
ENFORCEMENT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 13, 2014**
Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Stephanie McGee appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying her
leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) in her action concerning child support
*
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).
payments. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the
district court’s finding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, K2 Am. Corp. v.
Roland Oil & Gas, LLC, 653 F.3d 1024, 1027 (9th Cir. 2011), and for an abuse of
discretion the district court’s denial of leave to proceed IFP, Minetti v. Port of
Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1114 (9th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). We affirm.
The district court properly concluded that it lacked subject matter
jurisdiction over McGee’s action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) (requiring complete
diversity of citizenship); K2 Am. Corp., 653 F.3d at 1029 (discussing requirements
for federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331); see also Nevada v. Bank
of Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 673 (9th Cir. 2012) (“[A] court may raise the question
of subject matter jurisdiction, sua sponte, at any time during the pendency of the
action . . . .” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Accordingly, the
district court did not abuse its discretion by denying McGee’s request to proceed
IFP because it appears from the face of the amended complaint that McGee’s
action is frivolous or without merit. See Minetti, 152 F.3d at 1115 (concluding that
district court did not abuse its discretion by denying IFP application where plaintiff
lacked standing).
AFFIRMED.
2 13-16131