to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
How later courts described this case
- to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 18 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LANCE DELON ALVARADO, No. 24-2049
D.C. No. 2:23-cv-03041-TLN-CSK
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT
INSURANCE APPEALS
BOARD; CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 12, 2025**
Before: SCHROEDER, RAWLINSON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Lance Delon Alvarado appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims against state agencies
*
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).
arising from the denial of pandemic unemployment assistance benefits. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to
state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and for an abuse of discretion a
dismissal as frivolous under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25,
33 (1992); Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Alvarado’s action because Alvarado
failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim, and because several of
Alvarado’s claims were legally frivolous. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted)); Brewster v. Bd. of Educ. of Lynwood Unified
Sch. Dist., 149 F.3d 971, 982 (9th Cir. 1998) (setting forth the elements of a
procedural due process claim); see also Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325
(1989) (explaining that a complaint “is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis
either in law or in fact”).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
2 24-2049
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
3 24-2049