
    Phillip ALEXANDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAUL BROWN FARMERS INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 17-16741
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted December 18, 2017 
    
    Filed December 26, 2017
    Phillip Alexander, Pro Se
    Karl H. Smith, Esquire, Attorney, Law Offices of Karl H. Smith, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellee
    Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      
         The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P, 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The order to show cause (Docket Entry No. 2) is discharged.

Phillip Alexander appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action seeking damages related to an automobile accident. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Naffe v. Frey, 789 F.3d 1030, 1035 (9th Cir. 2015), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Alexander’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Alexander failed to allege facts sufficient to show that there is complete diversity between the parties. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Naffe, 789 F.3d at 1039 (setting forth elements of diversity jurisdiction). . ’

We reject as without merit Alexander’s contentions regarding default judgment.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition, is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
     