NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
JUL 29 2021
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LORIANN ANDERSON; et al., No. 19-35871
Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. 3:18-cv-02013-HZ
and
MEMORANDUM*
KERRIN FISCUS,
Plaintiff,
v.
SERVICE EMPLOYEES
INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU)
LOCAL 503, OREGON PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES UNION (OPEU), labor
organization; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
*
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).
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Loriann Anderson, Kenneth Hill, Rene Layton, Michael Miller, Bernard
Perkins, Dennis Richey, Kathie Simmons, Kent Wiles, and Melinda Wiltse appeal
from the district court’s judgment in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 putative class action
alleging a First Amendment claim arising out of union membership dues. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s
dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Daniels-Hall
v. Nat’l Educ. Ass’n, 629 F.3d 992, 998 (9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The parties agree that this court’s intervening decision in Belgau v. Inslee,
975 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, No. 20-1120, 2021 WL 2519114 (June
21, 2021), controls the outcome of this appeal. We affirm the district court’s
judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ action for failure to state a claim. See Belgau, 975
F.3d at 946-69 (discussing state action), 950-52 (concluding that the Supreme
Court’s decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal
Employees, Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448 (2018), did not extend a First Amendment
right to avoid paying union dues that were agreed upon under validly entered union
membership agreements).
Plaintiffs’ motion for summary affirmance, set forth in their reply brief, is
denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 19-35871