MEMORANDUM
Lance McDermott appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action concerning the closure of a postal facility, for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Rhoades v. Avon Prods., Inc., 504 F.3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir.2007). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed McDermott’s claims under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See United States v. Steele (In re Steele), 799 F.2d 461, 465-66 (9th Cir.1986) (failure to exhaust administrative remedies required under FOIA before seeking judicial review deprives district court of jurisdiction).
The district court properly dismissed McDermott’s remaining claims for lack of standing because the injuries he alleged were merely “conjectural” and “hypothetical.” City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102, 103 S.Ct. 1660, 75 L.Ed.2d 675 (1983).
McDermott’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.
disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.