June 26, 2026·5:24-cv-01053-HDV-·Unpublished·By Aisha Johnson
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a civil rights lawsuit filed by a pro se plaintiff against a casino and its security guards. The court held that the plaintiff failed to allege facts showing the defendants acted under color of state law as required for a Section nineteen eighty-three claim.
Background
Angel Felipe Aleman appealed pro se from a district court judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims against Aqua Caliente Casino, its owner, and a security officer. The district court had dismissed the case under twenty-eight U.S.C. Section one thousand nine hundred fifteen point five point two point B point two.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the dismissal de novo and affirmed because the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to show that the defendants were acting under color of state law. To avoid dismissal, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Section one thousand nine hundred eighty-three liability requires a defendant to act under color of state law, meaning the defendant must have exercised power possessed by virtue of state law.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that private security personnel at casinos generally cannot be held liable under Section nineteen eighty-three unless the plaintiff can plausibly allege they acted under color of state law.
