Gerald Wilson v. W. Montgomerey , 693 F. App'x 718 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUL 17 2017
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    GERALD J. WILSON,                               No.    16-56319
    Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No. 3:14-cv-01383-JAH-NLS
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    W. L. MONTGOMEREY, Warden; et al.,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of California
    John A. Houston, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted July 11, 2017**
    Before:      CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
    Gerald J. Wilson, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district
    court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate
    indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
    § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of
    *
    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).
    Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Hebbe v. Pliler, 
    627 F.3d 338
    , 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We
    affirm.
    In his opening brief, Wilson failed to challenge any of the district court’s
    grounds for dismissal of the operative complaint, and therefore Wilson waived any
    such challenge. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 
    350 F.3d 925
    , 929 (9th
    Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not consider any claims that were not actually argued in
    appellant’s opening brief.”); Smith v. Marsh, 
    194 F.3d 1045
    , 1052 (9th Cir. 1999)
    (“[A]rguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”).
    We reject as without merit Wilson’s contentions regarding his alleged failure
    to receive the magistrate’s report and recommendation.
    Wilson’s request for appointment of counsel and request for sanctions, set
    forth in his opening and reply briefs, are denied. Wilson’s request for in forma
    pauperis status, set forth in his reply brief, is denied as unnecessary.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                   16-56319
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-56319

Citation Numbers: 693 F. App'x 718

Judges: Canby, Kozinski, Hawkins

Filed Date: 7/17/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024