%PDF-1.3
%%
%%Page: 1 1
4 0 obj
<<
/Length 5 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 Tm
/F1 13 Tf 100 Tz
88.1395 -8.4 Td
1.3 Tw
0 Tc
(FOR PUBLICATION) Tj
/F1 15 Tf 100 Tz
-78.2395 -24 Td
1.5 Tw
(UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS) Tj
43.47 -16 Td
(FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-53.37 -18 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
0 0 Td
183.8 0 Td
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-2.18 -17.6 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -2.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ARK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( S. A) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
80.988 -13.2 Td
(Plaintiff-Appellant,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
134.082 -6.6 Td
(No. 05-15332) Tj
-132.57 -11.4 Td
(v.) Tj
144.234 -6.6 Td
(D.C. No.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-45.114 -7.9 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -3.5 Td
1.2 Tw
(G) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(; T) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(HE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ERRY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
201.342 -1.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(CV-04-00322-LKK) Tj
-201.342 -11.4 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(REEK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( R) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ANCHERIA) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(OF) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( T) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(YME) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AIDU) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
224.34 -6.6 Td
1.2 Tw
(OPINION) Tj
-224.34 -6.6 Td
(I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NDIANS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(; M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ATTIE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AYHEW) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
65.688 -13.2 Td
(Defendants-Appellees.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
115.932 -8.8 Td
1.6 Ts
2 Tw
() Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-142.878 -26.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(Appeal from the United States District Court) Tj
21.108 -13.2 Td
(for the Eastern District of California) Tj
-23.496 -13.2 Td
(Lawrence K. Karlton, Senior Judge, Presiding) Tj
58.116 -26.2 Td
(Argued and Submitted) Tj
-53.862 -13.2 Td
(August 14, 2006San Francisco, California) Tj
45.594 -26.2 Td
(Filed September 29, 2006) Tj
-73.662 -26.2 Td
(Before: William) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(C.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Canby,) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Jr., David) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(R.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Thompson, and) Tj
42.204 -13.2 Td
(Michael) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Daly) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Hawkins, Circuit) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Judges.) Tj
33.624 -26.2 Td
(Opinion by Judge Canby) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 cm
0 G
.9 w 0 -65.95 m 183.8 -65.95 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -116.9 m 186.6 -73.8 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -177 m 186.6 -133.9 l s
.9 w 0 -183.95 m 183.3 -183.95 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
292.25 -664.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17115) Tj
ET
Q
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
3187
endobj
3 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F3 8 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 4 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 2 2
12 0 obj
<<
/Length 13 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
120.996 -27.6 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(COUNSEL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-120.996 -26.2 Td
1.25 Tw
(Donald Earl Childress III, Jones Day, Washington, D.C., for) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(the plaintiff-appellant. ) Tj
0 -26.2 Td
2.65 Tw
(Blaine I. Green, Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman, LLP,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(San Francisco, California, for the defendants-appellees. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -8.15 m 300 -8.15 l s
.5 w 0 -131.15 m 300 -131.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17118) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
13 0 obj
1042
endobj
11 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 12 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 3 3
15 0 obj
<<
/Length 16 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
123.666 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(OPINION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-123.666 -26 Td
(CANBY, Circuit Judge: ) Tj
12 -26 Td
3.07 Tw
(Mark Allen is a former employee of the Gold Country) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.52 Tw
(Casino, which is owned and operated by the Tyme Maidu) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.85 Tw
(Tribe of the Berry Creek Rancheria in California. After the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(Casino fired Allen, he sued it and the Tribe. The district court) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(dismissed the claims against the Tribe and the Casino on the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.67 Tw
(ground of sovereign immunity. Allen concedes the Tribe's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.51 Tw
(immunity, but argues that the district court erred in extending) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.66 Tw
(that immunity to the Casino without scrutinizing the relation-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ship between the Tribe and the Casino. We find no error in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.07 Tw
(the district court's dismissal of Allen's claims against the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(Casino because the record and the law establish sufficiently) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(that it functions as an arm of the Tribe. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.75 Tw
(Allen also asserted various claims against Mattie Mayhew,) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.27 Tw
(a tribal member, and John Doe defendants. We reverse in part) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.52 Tw
(the district court's dismissal of these claims and remand for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.82 Tw
(consideration of Allen's claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.82 Tw
(1981 and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.83 Tw
(1985, along with any state law claims over which the district) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
126.504 -26 Td
(I.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Facts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-114.504 -26 Td
.84 Tw
(Allen was employed by Gold Country Casino as a surveil-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
4.37 Tw
(lance supervisor. Gold Country Casino is a tribal entity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(formed by a compact between the federally recognized Tyme) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(Maidu Tribe and the State of California. The Casino is wholly) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.63 Tw
(owned and operated by the Tribe. Allen contends he was dis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(charged in retaliation for reporting rats in the Casino's restau-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
5.74 Tw
(rant and for applying to ) Tj
(the white man's court) Tj
( for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(guardianship of three tribal children. ) Tj
12 -26.1 Td
.4 Tw
(Allen obtained a right to sue letter from the Equal Employ-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ment Opportunity Commission and, proceeding pro se, filed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.22 Tw
(this action in federal district court. Allen named as defendants) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17119) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
3250
endobj
14 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 15 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 4 4
18 0 obj
<<
/Length 19 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.9 Tw
0 Tc
(the Casino, the Tribe, Mattie Mayhew, and John Does 1 thru) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.47 Tw
(300, against whom he asserted various employment, civil) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.24 Tw
(rights, and conspiracy claims. The magistrate judge recom-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(mended that the claims against the Tribe be dismissed on the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.28 Tw
(ground of sovereign immunity. The magistrate judge assumed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.41 Tw
(without analysis that the Tribe's immunity extended to the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.7 Tw
(Casino. The magistrate judge found that the only remaining) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.46 Tw
(claim was for false accusations against Mayhew. He recom-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.71 Tw
(mended dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.37 Tw
(because this was a non-federal claim. The district court) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(adopted these recommendations and dismissed all claims. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.52 Tw
(On appeal, Allen, who is now represented by counsel, con-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(cedes that the Tribe is immune from suit. But he contends that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.66 Tw
(this immunity does not extend automatically to the Gold) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(Country Casino. He urges that the district court be required to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.85 Tw
(apply a three-part test to determine whether the Casino is) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.36 Tw
(analogous to a governmental agency or operating in a gov-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(ernmental capacity as an arm of the tribe.) Tj
( Allen argues in the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(alternative that, if the Casino is immune, it waived its immu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.41 Tw
(nity by referring to federal law in its employment materials.) Tj
12 -26 Td
.11 Tw
(We review de novo the district court's dismissal under Fed-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(eral Rule of Civil Procedure 12\(b\). ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Decker v. Advan-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.9 Tw
(tage Fund, Ltd.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 362 F.3d 593, 595-96 \(9th Cir. 2004\). We) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.82 Tw
(also review de novo questions of sovereign immunity and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(subject matter jurisdiction. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Orff v. United States) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 358 F.3d) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(1137, 1142 \(9th Cir. 2004\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
110.826 -26 Td
(II.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Discussion) Tj
-99.826 -26 Td
(A.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Sovereign Immunity of the Casino) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
3.65 Tw
([1]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Although the Supreme Court has expressed limited) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.9 Tw
(enthusiasm for tribal sovereign immunity, the doctrine is) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(firmly ensconced in our law until Congress chooses to modify) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.27 Tw
(it. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Kiowa Tribe v. Mfg. Techs., Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. 751, 757-60) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.28 Tw
(\(1998\). This immunity extends to business activities of the) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17120) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
19 0 obj
3625
endobj
17 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 18 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 5 5
21 0 obj
<<
/Length 22 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.06 Tw
0 Tc
(tribe, not merely to governmental activities. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See id. ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(at 760;) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
2.53 Tw
(Am. Vantage Cos. v. Table Mountain Rancheria) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 292 F.3d) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.73 Tw
(1091, 1100 \(9th Cir. 2002\).) Tj
( When the tribe establishes an) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.3 Tw
(entity to conduct certain activities, the entity is immune if it) Tj
0 -13 Td
.88 Tw
(functions as an arm of the tribe. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Marceau v. Black-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.06 Tw
(feet Hous. Auth) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(., 455 F.3d 974, 978 \(9th Cir. 2006\) \(holding) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.28 Tw
(that Blackfeet Tribe's sovereign immunity extends to Black-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.57 Tw
(feet Housing Authority\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Redding ) Tj
(Rancheria v. Super. Ct.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 88) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.03 Tw
(Cal. App. 4th 384, 388-89 \(2001\) \(holding that off-reservation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(casino owned and operated by tribe was arm of the tribe, and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.28 Tw
(therefore was entitled to sovereign immunity\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Trudgeon v.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.1 Tw
(Fantasy Springs Casino) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 71 Cal. App. 4th 632, 642 \(1999\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.2 Tw
(\(recognizing sovereign immunity of for-profit corporation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.9 Tw
(formed by a tribe to operate the tribe's casino\). The question) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.24 Tw
(is not whether the activity may be characterized as a business,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.47 Tw
(which is irrelevant under ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, but whether the entity acts) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.1 Tw
(as an arm of the tribe so that its activities are properly deemed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(to be those of the tribe. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.55 Tw
([2]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Allen's contention that the district court erred in failing) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.14 Tw
(to scrutinize the nature of the relationship between the Tribe) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(and the Casino fails to accord sufficient weight to the undis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(puted fact that the Casino is owned and operated by the Tribe.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.79 Tw
(Allen recognized the reality of the Casino as an arm of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.48 Tw
(Tribe when he sued the Tribe ) Tj
(d.b.a.) Tj
( \() Tj
(doing business as) Tj
(\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.11 Tw
(the Casino. And this is no ordinary business. The Casino's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.81 Tw
(creation was dependent upon government approval at numer-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(ous levels, in order for it to conduct gaming activities permit-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.97 Tw
(ted only under the auspices of the Tribe. The Indian Gaming) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(Regulatory Act \() Tj
(IGRA) Tj
(\), 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2 Tw
(2710\(d\)\(1\), required) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(the Tribe to authorize the Casino through a tribal ordinance) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.62 Tw
(and an interstate gaming compact. The Tribe and California) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.34 Tw
(entered into such a compact ) Tj
(on a government-to-government) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(basis.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
1.87 Tw
([3]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( These extraordinary steps were necessary because the) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
5.18 Tw
(Casino is not a mere revenue-producing tribal business) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.57 Tw
(\(although it is certainly that\). The IGRA provides for the cre-) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17121) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
22 0 obj
4185
endobj
20 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 21 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 6 6
24 0 obj
<<
/Length 25 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.07 Tw
0 Tc
(ation and operation of Indian casinos to promote ) Tj
(tribal eco-) Tj
0 -13 Td
7.94 Tw
(nomic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal) Tj
0 -13 Td
.5 Tw
(governments. 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.5 Tw
(2702\(1\). One of the principal pur-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.23 Tw
(poses of the IGRA is ) Tj
(to insure that the Indian tribe is the pri-) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.85 Tw
(mary beneficiary of the gaming operation.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.85 Tw
(2702\(2\).) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.41 Tw
(The compact that created the Gold Country Casino provides) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.7 Tw
(that the Casino will ) Tj
(enable the Tribe to develop self-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(sufficiency, promote tribal economic development, and gener-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(ate jobs and revenues to support the Tribe's government and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(governmental services and programs.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.96 Tw
([4]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( With the Tribe owning and operating the Casino, there) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(is no question that these economic and other advantages inure) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.7 Tw
(to the benefit of the Tribe. Immunity of the Casino directly) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(protects the sovereign Tribe's treasury, which is one of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(historic purposes of sovereign immunity in general. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf. Alden) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.36 Tw
(v. Maine) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 527 U.S. 706, 750 \(1999\) \(noting that sovereign) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.95 Tw
(immunity protects the financial integrity of States, many of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.52 Tw
(which ) Tj
(could have been forced into insolvency but for their) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.51 Tw
(immunity from private suits for money damages) Tj
(\). In light of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(the purposes for which the Tribe founded this Casino and the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.18 Tw
(Tribe's ownership and control of its operations, there can be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(little doubt that the Casino functions as an arm of the Tribe.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.03 Tw
(It accordingly enjoys the Tribe's immunity from suit. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(Ninigret Dev. Corp. v. Narragansett Indian Wetuomuck Hous.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(Auth.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 207 F.3d 21, 29 \(1st Cir. 2000\) \(stating that tribal hous-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ing authority ) Tj
(as an arm of the Tribe, enjoys the full extent) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(of the Tribe's sovereign immunity) Tj
(\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Marceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 455 F.3d at) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.75 Tw
(978 \(recognizing that tribal sovereign immunity ) Tj
(extends to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(agencies and subdivisions of the tribe) Tj
(\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26 Td
(B.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Waiver of Immunity) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
1.51 Tw
([5]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The Casino did not waive immunity when it provided) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(in Allen's employment application that he could be termi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(nated ) Tj
(for any reason consistent with applicable state or fed-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.47 Tw
(eral law,) Tj
( or when it stated in the Employee Orientation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(Booklet that it would ) Tj
(practice equal opportunity employment) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17122) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
25 0 obj
3999
endobj
23 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 24 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 7 7
27 0 obj
<<
/Length 28 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
4.71 Tw
0 Tc
(and promotion regardless of race, religion, color, creed,) Tj
0 -13 Td
.77 Tw
(national origin . . . and other categories protected by applica-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.48 Tw
(ble federal laws.) Tj
( ) Tj
(These statements are not a ) Tj
(clear) Tj
( waiver) Tj
0 -13 Td
.23 Tw
(of immunity. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See C & L Enters., Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawa-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.89 Tw
(tomi Indian Tribe) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 532 U.S. 411, 418 \(2001\). At most they) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.62 Tw
(might imply a willingness to submit to federal lawsuits, but) Tj
0 -13 Td
.36 Tw
(waivers of tribal sovereign immunity may not be implied. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.4 Tw
(Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 436 U.S. 49, 58 \(1978\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(\(explaining that a waiver of immunity ) Tj
(must be unequivocally) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(expressed) Tj
(\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.13 Tw
([6]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( This case is distinguishable from ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(C & L Enterprises ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(and) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-12 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(Marceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(C & L Enterprises) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, the Supreme Court held that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.03 Tw
(the tribe waived its immunity by expressly agreeing to arbitra-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(tion of disputes and to ) Tj
(enforcement of arbitral awards `in any) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.88 Tw
(court having jurisdiction thereof.') Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.88 Tw
( 532 U.S. at 414. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Mar-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.78 Tw
(ceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, the tribe established a housing authority by ordinance) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.5 Tw
(that gave the tribe's ) Tj
(irrevocable consent to allowing the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.79 Tw
(Authority to sue and be sued in its corporate name,) Tj
( and fur-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(ther provided that any judgment against the Authority would) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.54 Tw
(not be a lien on the Authority's property but would be paid) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.1 Tw
(out of ) Tj
(its rents, fees or revenues.) Tj
( 455 F.3d at 981. The state-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.71 Tw
(ments in Allen's employment documents did not approach) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(these explicit waivers of immunity from suit; the statements') Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.12 Tw
(references to federal law did not mention court enforcement,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(suing or being sued, or any other phrase clearly contemplating) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(suits against the Casino. These documents did not amount to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(an unequivocal waiver of the Casino's sovereign immunity. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
1.3 Tw
([7]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Allen further argues that we should analogize the pur-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.41 Tw
(ported waiver of tribal immunity to waivers of immunity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.75 Tw
(under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act \() Tj
(FSIA) Tj
(\), 28) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.53 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.53 Tw
(1605. That Act specifies exceptions to the immunity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.39 Tw
(of foreign states, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.39 Tw
(1605\(a\), which the Tribe is not. As we) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.22 Tw
(pointed out in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Richardson v. Mt. Adams Furniture \(In re) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.6 Tw
(Greene\)) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 980 F.2d 590 \(9th Cir. 1992\), the fact that Congress) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.37 Tw
(limited the immunity of foreign sovereigns simply under-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.88 Tw
(scores the breadth of sovereign immunity in the absence of) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17123) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
28 0 obj
4275
endobj
26 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 29 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 27 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 8 8
31 0 obj
<<
/Length 32 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.52 Tw
0 Tc
(congressional action; because Congress has not limited the) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.63 Tw
(immunity of Indian tribes, it retains its full force. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See id. ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(at) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.29 Tw
(594; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. 751, 759-60. There is simply) Tj
0 -13 Td
.96 Tw
(no room to apply the FSIA by analogy, as Allen would have) Tj
0 -13 Td
.9 Tw
(us do. The FSIA precludes immunity of a foreign state when) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.91 Tw
(that state engages in commercial activities in the United) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(States. 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.7 Tw
(1605\(a\)\(2\). To apply that provision to the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.95 Tw
(Tribe would contravene the Supreme Court's decision in) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
1.22 Tw
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, holding that tribal immunity extended to commercial) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.54 Tw
(activities of the tribe. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. at 760. FSIA also per-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.46 Tw
(mits a waiver of immunity to be implied, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(28 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.9 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
4.9 Tw
(1605\(a\)\(1\), while the Supreme Court permits no such) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.83 Tw
(implied waiver in the case of Indian tribes. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Santa) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(Clara Pueblo, ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(436 U.S. at 58. We accordingly decline Allen's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(invitation to apply FSIA by analogy to tribal sovereign immu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(nity. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26 Td
(C.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Allen's Remaining Claims) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
.7 Tw
([8]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Although the issue is not free from doubt, we conclude) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.6 Tw
(that the district court erred in its dismissal of the remainder) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.07 Tw
(of the complaint on the ground that it presented no federal) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.75 Tw
(claims against Mayhew and the unnamed defendants. Allen's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(pro se pleadings are unquestionably difficult to decipher, but) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.75 Tw
(they must be liberally construed. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Ortez v. Washington) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.14 Tw
(County) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 88 F.3d 804, 807 \(9th Cir. 1996\). In his response to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.53 Tw
(the defendants' motion to dismiss, Allen explained that he) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(was asserting against all defendants a claim under 42 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.67 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.67 Tw
(1985. He also accused all defendants except Mayhew of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(violating 42 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.17 Tw
(1981. Giving Allen the benefit of doubt,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.13 Tw
(we conclude that he should be given the opportunity to amend) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.87 Tw
(his complaint to assert these two claims intelligibly. We) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.44 Tw
(express no opinion, of course, on the procedural or substan-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.25 Tw
(tive merits of the claims beyond permitting Allen to assert) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(them. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
2.55 Tw
([9]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( If Allen proceeds in district court with these federal) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.42 Tw
(claims, the district court may have supplemental jurisdiction) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17124) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
32 0 obj
4136
endobj
30 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 29 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 31 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 9 9
34 0 obj
<<
/Length 35 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.53 Tw
0 Tc
(over Allen's state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.53 Tw
(1367. We) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.08 Tw
(therefore vacate the dismissal of Allen's state-law claims for) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.87 Tw
(lack of supplemental jurisdiction, so that the district court) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(may consider anew its jurisdiction over those claims. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.2 Td
2.11 Tw
([10]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We affirm the dismissal of Allen's claims under 18) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.11 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.11 Tw
(241 and 242 because these are criminal statutes that) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.5 Tw
(do not give rise to civil liability. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Aldabe v. Aldabe) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 616) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.43 Tw
(F.2d 1089, 1092 \(9th Cir. 1980\). Similarly, we affirm the dis-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.33 Tw
(missal of his claim under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.33 Tw
(1343 because this juris-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.97 Tw
(dictional statute does not provide a cause of action. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Ellis) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.13 Tw
(v. Cassidy) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 625 F.2d 227, 229 \(9th Cir. 1980\). The district) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.28 Tw
(court also properly dismissed Allen's claim under 42 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.03 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.03 Tw
(1983 because there is no allegation that any defendant was) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.75 Tw
(acting under the color of state law. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See West v. Atkins) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 487) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(U.S. 42, 45-46 \(1988\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
106.824 -26.2 Td
(III.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Conclusion) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-94.824 -26.2 Td
1 Tw
(We affirm the district court's judgment dismissing Allen's) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.27 Tw
(claims against the Tribe and Casino on the ground of sover-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.22 Tw
(eign immunity. We also affirm the dismissal of claims against) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.51 Tw
(the individual defendants under 18 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.51 Tw
(241 and 242, as) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.57 Tw
(well as claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.57 Tw
(1343 and 1983. We vacate) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.16 Tw
(and remand the judgment of dismissal without prejudice in) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.75 Tw
(favor of Mayhew and the Doe defendants because Allen) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.57 Tw
(asserted federal claims against those defendants under 42) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.87 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.87 Tw
(1985. Allen also asserted claims against the Doe) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.5 Tw
(defendants under 42 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.5 Tw
(1981. Finally, we vacate the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.66 Tw
(dismissal of state-law claims for lack of supplemental juris-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.96 Tw
(diction, and remand for any appropriate exercise of supple-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(mental jurisdiction over those claims. ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
(The parties will bear their own costs on appeal. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.2 Td
.46 Tw
(AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(IN PART. ) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17125) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
35 0 obj
3645
endobj
33 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 29 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 34 0 R
>>
endobj
1 0 obj
[ /PDF /Text ]
endobj
36 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
37 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Bold
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 935 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 139.00
/StemH 69.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 676
/XHeight 461
/Ascent 676
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
6 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F1
/BaseFont /Times-Bold
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 570 570 570 570 570 300 300
250 333 555 500 500 1000 833 333 333 333 500 570 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 570 570 570 500
930 722 667 722 722 667 611 778 778 389 500 778 667 944 722 778
611 778 722 556 667 722 722 1000 722 722 667 333 278 333 581 500
333 500 556 444 556 444 333 500 556 278 333 556 278 833 556 500
556 556 444 389 333 556 500 722 500 500 444 394 220 394 520 400
722 556 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
667 611 556 500 500 500 556 556 500 778 722 722 722 722 722 667
500 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 278 500 500 333 333 556 556
667 500 500 500 250 667 540 350 333 500 500 500 1000 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 556 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 556 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 556 667 444 747 747 1000
389 1000 389 300 389 389 778 778 667 778 1000 330 778 778 722 722
722 722 722 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 556 278 500 500 220 ]
/Encoding 36 0 R
/FontDescriptor 37 0 R
>>
endobj
38 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
39 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Roman
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 898 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 84.00
/StemH 42.00
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 662
/XHeight 450
/Ascent 683
/Descent -217
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
7 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F2
/BaseFont /Times-Roman
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 564 564 564 564 564 300 300
250 333 408 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 564 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 564 564 564 444
921 722 667 667 722 611 556 722 722 333 389 722 611 889 722 722
556 722 667 556 611 722 722 944 722 722 611 333 278 333 469 500
333 444 500 444 500 444 333 500 500 278 278 500 278 778 500 500
500 500 333 389 278 500 500 722 500 500 444 480 200 480 541 400
667 500 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
611 556 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 722 722 722 722 722 722 611
444 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 180 444 500 333 333 556 556
611 500 500 500 250 611 453 350 333 444 444 500 1000 1000 722 444
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 500 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 500 611 444 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 611 722 889 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 722 444 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 500 278 500 500 200 ]
/Encoding 38 0 R
/FontDescriptor 39 0 R
>>
endobj
40 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 240 /apple ]
>>
endobj
41 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Symbol
/Flags 4
/FontBBox [ -180 -293 1090 1010 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 85.00
/StemH 42.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 0
/XHeight 0
/Ascent 0
/Descent 0
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
8 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F3
/BaseFont /Symbol
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 333 713 500 549 833 778 439 333 333 500 549 250 549 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 549 549 549 444
549 722 667 722 612 611 763 603 722 333 631 722 686 889 722 722
768 741 556 592 611 690 439 768 645 795 611 333 863 333 658 500
500 631 549 549 494 439 521 411 603 329 603 549 549 576 521 549
549 521 549 603 439 576 713 686 493 686 494 480 200 480 549 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 620 247 549 167 713 500 753 753 753 753 1042 987 603 987 603
400 549 411 549 549 713 494 460 549 549 549 549 1000 603 1000 658
823 686 795 987 768 768 823 768 768 713 713 713 713 713 713 713
768 713 790 250 250 250 549 250 713 603 603 1042 987 603 987 603
494 329 790 790 786 713 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 494
790 329 274 686 686 686 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 250 ]
/Encoding 40 0 R
/FontDescriptor 41 0 R
>>
endobj
42 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
43 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Italic
/Flags 98
/FontBBox [ -169 -217 1010 883 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 76.00
/StemH 38.00
/ItalicAngle -15.50
/CapHeight 653
/XHeight 441
/Ascent 683
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
9 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F4
/BaseFont /Times-Italic
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 675 675 675 675 675 300 300
250 333 420 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 675 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 675 675 675 500
920 611 611 667 722 611 611 722 722 333 444 667 556 833 667 722
611 722 611 500 556 722 611 833 611 556 556 389 278 389 422 500
333 500 500 444 500 444 278 500 500 278 278 444 278 722 500 500
500 500 389 389 278 500 444 667 444 444 389 400 275 400 541 400
667 500 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 611 611
611 611 500 500 500 500 500 500 444 722 722 611 611 611 611 611
500 389 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 214 556 500 333 333 500 500
611 500 500 500 250 611 523 350 333 556 556 500 889 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
889 667 500 250 250 250 500 389 556 444 500 556 389 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 556 722 944 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 556 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 667 500 278 500 500 275 ]
/Encoding 42 0 R
/FontDescriptor 43 0 R
>>
endobj
10 0 obj
<<
/Kids [3 0 R 11 0 R 14 0 R 17 0 R 20 0 R 23 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 44 0 R
>>
endobj
29 0 obj
<<
/Kids [26 0 R 30 0 R 33 0 R]
/Count 3
/Type /Pages
/Parent 44 0 R
>>
endobj
44 0 obj
<<
/Kids [10 0 R 29 0 R]
/Count 9
/Type /Pages
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
>>
endobj
2 0 obj
<<
/Type /Catalog
/Pages 44 0 R
>>
endobj
45 0 obj
<<
/CreationDate (Wednesday September 27, 2006 10:48:52)
/Creator (VERSACOMP R05.2)
/Producer (ECMP5)
>>
endobj
xref
0 46
0000000000 65535 f
0000033957 00000 n
0000043800 00000 n
0000003313 00000 n
0000000044 00000 n
0000003290 00000 n
0000035422 00000 n
0000038074 00000 n
0000039628 00000 n
0000042275 00000 n
0000043490 00000 n
0000004654 00000 n
0000003527 00000 n
0000004630 00000 n
0000008183 00000 n
0000004848 00000 n
0000008159 00000 n
0000012087 00000 n
0000008377 00000 n
0000012063 00000 n
0000016562 00000 n
0000012292 00000 n
0000016538 00000 n
0000020851 00000 n
0000016767 00000 n
0000020827 00000 n
0000025416 00000 n
0000021056 00000 n
0000025392 00000 n
0000043606 00000 n
0000029842 00000 n
0000025621 00000 n
0000029818 00000 n
0000033777 00000 n
0000030047 00000 n
0000033753 00000 n
0000033990 00000 n
0000035142 00000 n
0000036642 00000 n
0000037794 00000 n
0000039290 00000 n
0000039362 00000 n
0000040840 00000 n
0000041992 00000 n
0000043702 00000 n
0000043856 00000 n
trailer
<<
/Size 46
/Root 2 0 R
/Info 45 0 R
>>
startxref
43993
%%EOF
2 0 obj
<>
endobj
4 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 Tm
/F1 13 Tf 100 Tz
88.1395 -8.4 Td
1.3 Tw
0 Tc
(FOR PUBLICATION) Tj
/F1 15 Tf 100 Tz
-78.2395 -24 Td
1.5 Tw
(UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS) Tj
43.47 -16 Td
(FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-53.37 -18 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
0 0 Td
183.8 0 Td
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-2.18 -17.6 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -2.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ARK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( S. A) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
80.988 -13.2 Td
(Plaintiff-Appellant,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
134.082 -6.6 Td
(No. 05-15332) Tj
-132.57 -11.4 Td
(v.) Tj
144.234 -6.6 Td
(D.C. No.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-45.114 -7.9 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -3.5 Td
1.2 Tw
(G) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(; T) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(HE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( B) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ERRY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
201.342 -1.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(CV-04-00322-LKK) Tj
-201.342 -11.4 Td
(C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(REEK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( R) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ANCHERIA) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(OF) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( T) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(YME) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AIDU) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
224.34 -6.6 Td
1.2 Tw
(OPINION) Tj
-224.34 -6.6 Td
(I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NDIANS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(; M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ATTIE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AYHEW) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
65.688 -13.2 Td
(Defendants-Appellees.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
115.932 -8.8 Td
1.6 Ts
2 Tw
() Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-142.878 -26.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(Appeal from the United States District Court) Tj
21.108 -13.2 Td
(for the Eastern District of California) Tj
-23.496 -13.2 Td
(Lawrence K. Karlton, Senior Judge, Presiding) Tj
58.116 -26.2 Td
(Argued and Submitted) Tj
-53.862 -13.2 Td
(August 14, 2006San Francisco, California) Tj
45.594 -26.2 Td
(Filed September 29, 2006) Tj
-73.662 -26.2 Td
(Before: William) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(C.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Canby,) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Jr., David) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(R.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Thompson, and) Tj
42.204 -13.2 Td
(Michael) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Daly) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Hawkins, Circuit) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Judges.) Tj
33.624 -26.2 Td
(Opinion by Judge Canby) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 cm
0 G
.9 w 0 -65.95 m 183.8 -65.95 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -116.9 m 186.6 -73.8 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -177 m 186.6 -133.9 l s
.9 w 0 -183.95 m 183.3 -183.95 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
292.25 -664.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17115) Tj
ET
Q
endstream
endobj
12 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
120.996 -27.6 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(COUNSEL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-120.996 -26.2 Td
1.25 Tw
(Donald Earl Childress III, Jones Day, Washington, D.C., for) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(the plaintiff-appellant. ) Tj
0 -26.2 Td
2.65 Tw
(Blaine I. Green, Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman, LLP,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(San Francisco, California, for the defendants-appellees. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -8.15 m 300 -8.15 l s
.5 w 0 -131.15 m 300 -131.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17118) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
15 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
123.666 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(OPINION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-123.666 -26 Td
(CANBY, Circuit Judge: ) Tj
12 -26 Td
3.07 Tw
(Mark Allen is a former employee of the Gold Country) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.52 Tw
(Casino, which is owned and operated by the Tyme Maidu) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.85 Tw
(Tribe of the Berry Creek Rancheria in California. After the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(Casino fired Allen, he sued it and the Tribe. The district court) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(dismissed the claims against the Tribe and the Casino on the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.67 Tw
(ground of sovereign immunity. Allen concedes the Tribe's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.51 Tw
(immunity, but argues that the district court erred in extending) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.66 Tw
(that immunity to the Casino without scrutinizing the relation-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ship between the Tribe and the Casino. We find no error in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.07 Tw
(the district court's dismissal of Allen's claims against the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(Casino because the record and the law establish sufficiently) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(that it functions as an arm of the Tribe. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.75 Tw
(Allen also asserted various claims against Mattie Mayhew,) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.27 Tw
(a tribal member, and John Doe defendants. We reverse in part) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.52 Tw
(the district court's dismissal of these claims and remand for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.82 Tw
(consideration of Allen's claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.82 Tw
(1981 and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.83 Tw
(1985, along with any state law claims over which the district) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
126.504 -26 Td
(I.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Facts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-114.504 -26 Td
.84 Tw
(Allen was employed by Gold Country Casino as a surveil-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
4.37 Tw
(lance supervisor. Gold Country Casino is a tribal entity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(formed by a compact between the federally recognized Tyme) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(Maidu Tribe and the State of California. The Casino is wholly) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.63 Tw
(owned and operated by the Tribe. Allen contends he was dis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(charged in retaliation for reporting rats in the Casino's restau-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
5.74 Tw
(rant and for applying to ) Tj
(the white man's court) Tj
( for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(guardianship of three tribal children. ) Tj
12 -26.1 Td
.4 Tw
(Allen obtained a right to sue letter from the Equal Employ-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ment Opportunity Commission and, proceeding pro se, filed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.22 Tw
(this action in federal district court. Allen named as defendants) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17119) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
18 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.9 Tw
0 Tc
(the Casino, the Tribe, Mattie Mayhew, and John Does 1 thru) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.47 Tw
(300, against whom he asserted various employment, civil) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.24 Tw
(rights, and conspiracy claims. The magistrate judge recom-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(mended that the claims against the Tribe be dismissed on the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.28 Tw
(ground of sovereign immunity. The magistrate judge assumed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.41 Tw
(without analysis that the Tribe's immunity extended to the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.7 Tw
(Casino. The magistrate judge found that the only remaining) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.46 Tw
(claim was for false accusations against Mayhew. He recom-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.71 Tw
(mended dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.37 Tw
(because this was a non-federal claim. The district court) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(adopted these recommendations and dismissed all claims. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.52 Tw
(On appeal, Allen, who is now represented by counsel, con-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(cedes that the Tribe is immune from suit. But he contends that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.66 Tw
(this immunity does not extend automatically to the Gold) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(Country Casino. He urges that the district court be required to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.85 Tw
(apply a three-part test to determine whether the Casino is) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.36 Tw
(analogous to a governmental agency or operating in a gov-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(ernmental capacity as an arm of the tribe.) Tj
( Allen argues in the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(alternative that, if the Casino is immune, it waived its immu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.41 Tw
(nity by referring to federal law in its employment materials.) Tj
12 -26 Td
.11 Tw
(We review de novo the district court's dismissal under Fed-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(eral Rule of Civil Procedure 12\(b\). ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Decker v. Advan-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.9 Tw
(tage Fund, Ltd.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 362 F.3d 593, 595-96 \(9th Cir. 2004\). We) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.82 Tw
(also review de novo questions of sovereign immunity and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(subject matter jurisdiction. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Orff v. United States) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 358 F.3d) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(1137, 1142 \(9th Cir. 2004\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
110.826 -26 Td
(II.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Discussion) Tj
-99.826 -26 Td
(A.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Sovereign Immunity of the Casino) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
3.65 Tw
([1]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Although the Supreme Court has expressed limited) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.9 Tw
(enthusiasm for tribal sovereign immunity, the doctrine is) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(firmly ensconced in our law until Congress chooses to modify) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.27 Tw
(it. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Kiowa Tribe v. Mfg. Techs., Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. 751, 757-60) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.28 Tw
(\(1998\). This immunity extends to business activities of the) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17120) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
21 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.06 Tw
0 Tc
(tribe, not merely to governmental activities. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See id. ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(at 760;) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
2.53 Tw
(Am. Vantage Cos. v. Table Mountain Rancheria) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 292 F.3d) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.73 Tw
(1091, 1100 \(9th Cir. 2002\).) Tj
( When the tribe establishes an) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.3 Tw
(entity to conduct certain activities, the entity is immune if it) Tj
0 -13 Td
.88 Tw
(functions as an arm of the tribe. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Marceau v. Black-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.06 Tw
(feet Hous. Auth) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(., 455 F.3d 974, 978 \(9th Cir. 2006\) \(holding) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.28 Tw
(that Blackfeet Tribe's sovereign immunity extends to Black-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.57 Tw
(feet Housing Authority\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Redding ) Tj
(Rancheria v. Super. Ct.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 88) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.03 Tw
(Cal. App. 4th 384, 388-89 \(2001\) \(holding that off-reservation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(casino owned and operated by tribe was arm of the tribe, and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.28 Tw
(therefore was entitled to sovereign immunity\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Trudgeon v.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.1 Tw
(Fantasy Springs Casino) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 71 Cal. App. 4th 632, 642 \(1999\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.2 Tw
(\(recognizing sovereign immunity of for-profit corporation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.9 Tw
(formed by a tribe to operate the tribe's casino\). The question) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.24 Tw
(is not whether the activity may be characterized as a business,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.47 Tw
(which is irrelevant under ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, but whether the entity acts) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.1 Tw
(as an arm of the tribe so that its activities are properly deemed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(to be those of the tribe. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.55 Tw
([2]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Allen's contention that the district court erred in failing) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.14 Tw
(to scrutinize the nature of the relationship between the Tribe) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(and the Casino fails to accord sufficient weight to the undis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(puted fact that the Casino is owned and operated by the Tribe.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.79 Tw
(Allen recognized the reality of the Casino as an arm of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.48 Tw
(Tribe when he sued the Tribe ) Tj
(d.b.a.) Tj
( \() Tj
(doing business as) Tj
(\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.11 Tw
(the Casino. And this is no ordinary business. The Casino's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.81 Tw
(creation was dependent upon government approval at numer-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(ous levels, in order for it to conduct gaming activities permit-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.97 Tw
(ted only under the auspices of the Tribe. The Indian Gaming) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(Regulatory Act \() Tj
(IGRA) Tj
(\), 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2 Tw
(2710\(d\)\(1\), required) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.66 Tw
(the Tribe to authorize the Casino through a tribal ordinance) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.62 Tw
(and an interstate gaming compact. The Tribe and California) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.34 Tw
(entered into such a compact ) Tj
(on a government-to-government) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(basis.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
1.87 Tw
([3]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( These extraordinary steps were necessary because the) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
5.18 Tw
(Casino is not a mere revenue-producing tribal business) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.57 Tw
(\(although it is certainly that\). The IGRA provides for the cre-) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17121) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
24 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.07 Tw
0 Tc
(ation and operation of Indian casinos to promote ) Tj
(tribal eco-) Tj
0 -13 Td
7.94 Tw
(nomic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal) Tj
0 -13 Td
.5 Tw
(governments. 25 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.5 Tw
(2702\(1\). One of the principal pur-) Tj
0 -13 Td
.23 Tw
(poses of the IGRA is ) Tj
(to insure that the Indian tribe is the pri-) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.85 Tw
(mary beneficiary of the gaming operation.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.85 Tw
(2702\(2\).) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.41 Tw
(The compact that created the Gold Country Casino provides) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.7 Tw
(that the Casino will ) Tj
(enable the Tribe to develop self-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(sufficiency, promote tribal economic development, and gener-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(ate jobs and revenues to support the Tribe's government and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(governmental services and programs.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.96 Tw
([4]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( With the Tribe owning and operating the Casino, there) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.33 Tw
(is no question that these economic and other advantages inure) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.7 Tw
(to the benefit of the Tribe. Immunity of the Casino directly) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(protects the sovereign Tribe's treasury, which is one of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(historic purposes of sovereign immunity in general. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf. Alden) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.36 Tw
(v. Maine) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 527 U.S. 706, 750 \(1999\) \(noting that sovereign) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.95 Tw
(immunity protects the financial integrity of States, many of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.52 Tw
(which ) Tj
(could have been forced into insolvency but for their) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.51 Tw
(immunity from private suits for money damages) Tj
(\). In light of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.67 Tw
(the purposes for which the Tribe founded this Casino and the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.18 Tw
(Tribe's ownership and control of its operations, there can be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(little doubt that the Casino functions as an arm of the Tribe.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.03 Tw
(It accordingly enjoys the Tribe's immunity from suit. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(Ninigret Dev. Corp. v. Narragansett Indian Wetuomuck Hous.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(Auth.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 207 F.3d 21, 29 \(1st Cir. 2000\) \(stating that tribal hous-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(ing authority ) Tj
(as an arm of the Tribe, enjoys the full extent) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(of the Tribe's sovereign immunity) Tj
(\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Marceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 455 F.3d at) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.75 Tw
(978 \(recognizing that tribal sovereign immunity ) Tj
(extends to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(agencies and subdivisions of the tribe) Tj
(\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26 Td
(B.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Waiver of Immunity) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
1.51 Tw
([5]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The Casino did not waive immunity when it provided) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(in Allen's employment application that he could be termi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(nated ) Tj
(for any reason consistent with applicable state or fed-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.47 Tw
(eral law,) Tj
( or when it stated in the Employee Orientation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(Booklet that it would ) Tj
(practice equal opportunity employment) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17122) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
27 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
4.71 Tw
0 Tc
(and promotion regardless of race, religion, color, creed,) Tj
0 -13 Td
.77 Tw
(national origin . . . and other categories protected by applica-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.48 Tw
(ble federal laws.) Tj
( ) Tj
(These statements are not a ) Tj
(clear) Tj
( waiver) Tj
0 -13 Td
.23 Tw
(of immunity. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See C & L Enters., Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawa-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.89 Tw
(tomi Indian Tribe) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 532 U.S. 411, 418 \(2001\). At most they) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.62 Tw
(might imply a willingness to submit to federal lawsuits, but) Tj
0 -13 Td
.36 Tw
(waivers of tribal sovereign immunity may not be implied. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.4 Tw
(Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 436 U.S. 49, 58 \(1978\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(\(explaining that a waiver of immunity ) Tj
(must be unequivocally) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(expressed) Tj
(\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
.13 Tw
([6]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( This case is distinguishable from ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(C & L Enterprises ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(and) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-12 -13.1 Td
.8 Tw
(Marceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(C & L Enterprises) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, the Supreme Court held that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.03 Tw
(the tribe waived its immunity by expressly agreeing to arbitra-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(tion of disputes and to ) Tj
(enforcement of arbitral awards `in any) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.88 Tw
(court having jurisdiction thereof.') Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.88 Tw
( 532 U.S. at 414. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Mar-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.78 Tw
(ceau) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, the tribe established a housing authority by ordinance) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.5 Tw
(that gave the tribe's ) Tj
(irrevocable consent to allowing the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.79 Tw
(Authority to sue and be sued in its corporate name,) Tj
( and fur-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(ther provided that any judgment against the Authority would) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.54 Tw
(not be a lien on the Authority's property but would be paid) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.1 Tw
(out of ) Tj
(its rents, fees or revenues.) Tj
( 455 F.3d at 981. The state-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.71 Tw
(ments in Allen's employment documents did not approach) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(these explicit waivers of immunity from suit; the statements') Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.12 Tw
(references to federal law did not mention court enforcement,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(suing or being sued, or any other phrase clearly contemplating) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(suits against the Casino. These documents did not amount to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(an unequivocal waiver of the Casino's sovereign immunity. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
1.3 Tw
([7]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Allen further argues that we should analogize the pur-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.41 Tw
(ported waiver of tribal immunity to waivers of immunity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.75 Tw
(under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act \() Tj
(FSIA) Tj
(\), 28) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.53 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.53 Tw
(1605. That Act specifies exceptions to the immunity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.39 Tw
(of foreign states, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.39 Tw
(1605\(a\), which the Tribe is not. As we) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.22 Tw
(pointed out in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Richardson v. Mt. Adams Furniture \(In re) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.6 Tw
(Greene\)) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 980 F.2d 590 \(9th Cir. 1992\), the fact that Congress) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.37 Tw
(limited the immunity of foreign sovereigns simply under-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.88 Tw
(scores the breadth of sovereign immunity in the absence of) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17123) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
31 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.52 Tw
0 Tc
(congressional action; because Congress has not limited the) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.63 Tw
(immunity of Indian tribes, it retains its full force. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See id. ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(at) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.29 Tw
(594; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. 751, 759-60. There is simply) Tj
0 -13 Td
.96 Tw
(no room to apply the FSIA by analogy, as Allen would have) Tj
0 -13 Td
.9 Tw
(us do. The FSIA precludes immunity of a foreign state when) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.91 Tw
(that state engages in commercial activities in the United) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(States. 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.7 Tw
(1605\(a\)\(2\). To apply that provision to the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.95 Tw
(Tribe would contravene the Supreme Court's decision in) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
1.22 Tw
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, holding that tribal immunity extended to commercial) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.54 Tw
(activities of the tribe. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kiowa) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 523 U.S. at 760. FSIA also per-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.46 Tw
(mits a waiver of immunity to be implied, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(28 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.9 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
4.9 Tw
(1605\(a\)\(1\), while the Supreme Court permits no such) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.83 Tw
(implied waiver in the case of Indian tribes. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Santa) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.18 Tw
(Clara Pueblo, ) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(436 U.S. at 58. We accordingly decline Allen's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(invitation to apply FSIA by analogy to tribal sovereign immu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(nity. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
11 -26 Td
(C.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Allen's Remaining Claims) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
1 -26 Td
.7 Tw
([8]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Although the issue is not free from doubt, we conclude) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.6 Tw
(that the district court erred in its dismissal of the remainder) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.07 Tw
(of the complaint on the ground that it presented no federal) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.75 Tw
(claims against Mayhew and the unnamed defendants. Allen's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(pro se pleadings are unquestionably difficult to decipher, but) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.75 Tw
(they must be liberally construed. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Ortez v. Washington) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.14 Tw
(County) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 88 F.3d 804, 807 \(9th Cir. 1996\). In his response to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.53 Tw
(the defendants' motion to dismiss, Allen explained that he) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(was asserting against all defendants a claim under 42 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.67 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.67 Tw
(1985. He also accused all defendants except Mayhew of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.17 Tw
(violating 42 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.17 Tw
(1981. Giving Allen the benefit of doubt,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.13 Tw
(we conclude that he should be given the opportunity to amend) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.87 Tw
(his complaint to assert these two claims intelligibly. We) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.44 Tw
(express no opinion, of course, on the procedural or substan-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.25 Tw
(tive merits of the claims beyond permitting Allen to assert) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(them. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
2.55 Tw
([9]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( If Allen proceeds in district court with these federal) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.42 Tw
(claims, the district court may have supplemental jurisdiction) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17124) Tj
76.7551 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.53 Tw
0 Tc
(over Allen's state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.53 Tw
(1367. We) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.08 Tw
(therefore vacate the dismissal of Allen's state-law claims for) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.87 Tw
(lack of supplemental jurisdiction, so that the district court) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(may consider anew its jurisdiction over those claims. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.2 Td
2.11 Tw
([10]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We affirm the dismissal of Allen's claims under 18) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.11 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.11 Tw
(241 and 242 because these are criminal statutes that) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.5 Tw
(do not give rise to civil liability. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Aldabe v. Aldabe) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 616) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.43 Tw
(F.2d 1089, 1092 \(9th Cir. 1980\). Similarly, we affirm the dis-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.33 Tw
(missal of his claim under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.33 Tw
(1343 because this juris-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.97 Tw
(dictional statute does not provide a cause of action. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See Ellis) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.13 Tw
(v. Cassidy) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 625 F.2d 227, 229 \(9th Cir. 1980\). The district) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.28 Tw
(court also properly dismissed Allen's claim under 42 U.S.C.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.03 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.03 Tw
(1983 because there is no allegation that any defendant was) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.75 Tw
(acting under the color of state law. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See West v. Atkins) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 487) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(U.S. 42, 45-46 \(1988\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
106.824 -26.2 Td
(III.) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Conclusion) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-94.824 -26.2 Td
1 Tw
(We affirm the district court's judgment dismissing Allen's) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.27 Tw
(claims against the Tribe and Casino on the ground of sover-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.22 Tw
(eign immunity. We also affirm the dismissal of claims against) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.51 Tw
(the individual defendants under 18 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.51 Tw
(241 and 242, as) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.57 Tw
(well as claims under 28 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.57 Tw
(1343 and 1983. We vacate) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.16 Tw
(and remand the judgment of dismissal without prejudice in) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.75 Tw
(favor of Mayhew and the Doe defendants because Allen) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.57 Tw
(asserted federal claims against those defendants under 42) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.87 Tw
(U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.87 Tw
(1985. Allen also asserted claims against the Doe) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.5 Tw
(defendants under 42 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.5 Tw
(1981. Finally, we vacate the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.66 Tw
(dismissal of state-law claims for lack of supplemental juris-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.96 Tw
(diction, and remand for any appropriate exercise of supple-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(mental jurisdiction over those claims. ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
(The parties will bear their own costs on appeal. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.2 Td
.46 Tw
(AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(IN PART. ) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(17125) Tj
-195.7449 0 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(LLEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. G) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLD) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUNTRY) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ASINO) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
46 0 obj
<>
endobj
47 0 obj
<>stream
Wednesday September 27, 2006 10:48:52
ECMP5
VERSACOMP R05.2
2008-03-21T16:47:02-06:00
2008-03-21T16:47:02-06:00
2008-03-21T16:47:02-06:00
application/pdf
Mark S. Allen v. Gold Country Casino
uuid:686643c3-e460-4575-aa8d-c0c440ef5ccc
uuid:40c4a3c0-cf40-4003-938c-f39d3a7c565c
endstream
endobj
xref
2 1
0000045004 00000 n
4 1
0000045066 00000 n
12 1
0000048304 00000 n
15 1
0000049398 00000 n
18 1
0000052700 00000 n
21 1
0000056377 00000 n
24 1
0000060614 00000 n
27 1
0000064665 00000 n
31 1
0000068992 00000 n
34 1
0000073180 00000 n
46 2
0000076877 00000 n
0000077126 00000 n
trailer
<]/Prev 43993 >>
startxref
80872
%%EOF