N v. David Goodrich , 693 F. App'x 601 ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 5 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: ROBERT W. HUNT, M.D., a No. 16-55679
Medical Corporation,
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-00667-AG
Debtor.
______________________________
MEMORANDUM*
PELI POPOVICH HUNT,
Appellant,
v.
DAVID M. GOODRICH, Chapter 7
Trustee; PETER C. ANDERSON, United
States Trustee,
Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Peli Popovich Hunt appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying
her post-judgment motions “for rulings on leave to file as a vexatious litigant and
return of bonds,” to disqualify the chapter 7 trustee, and for reconsideration. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d) and 1291. We affirm.
In the opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the district court erred in
denying her motions. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the district
court’s orders. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[O]n
appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”);
Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We review only issues
which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief.”).
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-55679