FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8641649
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Perry v. Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc.

No. 8641649 · Decided June 14, 2007
No. 8641649 · Ninth Circuit · 2007 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 14, 2007
Citation
No. 8641649
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Kevin Perry appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without leave to amend his action against Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., and First Transit, Inc., alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 (“RICO”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc., 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998), and review for abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend a complaint, Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc., 194 F.3d 980, 983 (1999). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Perry’s claims brought under RICO because Perry did not allege facts indicating that defendants collected an unlawful debt, see Sundance Land Corp. v. Comty. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 840 F.2d 653, 665 (9th Cir.1988), or engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, see Moore v. Kayport Package Express, Inc., 885 F.2d 531, 541 (9th Cir.1989). The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Perry’s motion for leave to amend his complaint because Perry did not present any new facts to support his proposed Second Amended Complaint that would withstand a motion to *635 dismiss. See Bonin v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9th Cir.1995) (“[A] district court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to amend where the movant presents no new facts ... and provides no satisfactory explanation for his failure to fully develop his contentions originally.”). Because the district court properly dismissed Perry’s federal claims, the court did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. See Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc., 328 F.3d 1136 , 1143 n. 7 (9th Cir.2003). The Appellee’s request for judicial notice is denied as moot. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Kevin Perry appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without leave to amend his action against Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., and First Transit, Inc., alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Co
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Kevin Perry appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing without leave to amend his action against Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., and First Transit, Inc., alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Co
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Perry v. Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc. in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 14, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8641649 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →