With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". arising from his arrest for suspicion of child abuse. We have jurisdiction under to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo dismissals pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dep’t, 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir.1988), and we affirm. Because Luna failed to allege constitutional deprivations that were the result of any official policy or practice, the district court properly dismissed his section 1983 claims against the City of San Bernardino. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 668, 694, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978). Because Luna failed to allege sufficient facts, the district court properly dismissed his equal protection claim. See Village of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 265, 97 S.Ct. 555, 50 L.Ed.2d 450 (1977) (<HOLDING>); see also Sherman v. Yakahi, 549 F.2d 1287,

A: holding that when plaintiffs allege classwide racially discriminatory treatment in violation of title vii proof of discriminatory motive is essential although the burden may be met in some situations by presentation of statistical evidence that permits an inference of racial discrimination
B: holding proof of racially discriminatory intent or purpose required to show equal protection violation
C: holding that the sentencing guidelines disparate treatment of crack cocaine is not racially discriminatory under the fifth amendments equal protection guarantees
D: holding that state court enforcement of racially restrictive covenants constituted state action in violation of the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment
B.