With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Nevada state prisoner Christopher Jones appeals pro se the district court’s judgment, dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that he was entitled to entry of default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) against a defendant in another civil rights action. We have jurisdiction under to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order), and we affirm. The district court properly dismissed Jones’ action against the United States District Court and court officials because these defendants are immune from liability. See Moore v. Brewster, 96 F.3d 1240, 1243-44 (9th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). The district court properly dismissed Jones’

A: holding that a prisoners transfer mooted claims for declaratory and injunctive relief
B: holding that judicial immunity was not a bar to awards of attorneys fees and costs or to demands for injunctive relief
C: holding that there is an exception to eleventh amendment immunity for actions seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against state officials for alleged violations of federal law
D: holding that the judicial immunity available to federal officers extends to section 1983 actions for declaratory and injunctive relief
D.