Robert Hunt v. Peter Anderson , 693 F. App'x 586 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                              NOT FOR PUBLICATION                         FILED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 the Matter of: ROBERT W. HUNT,       No. 16-55646
    M.D., DBA Intercommunity Medical Group,
    D.C. No. 2:15-cv-09970-RGK
    Debtor.
    ______________________________
    MEMORANDUM*
    PELI POPOVICH HUNT,
    Appellant,
    v.
    PETER C. ANDERSON, United States
    Trustee; DAVID M. GOODRICH, Chapter
    7 Trustee,
    Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    R. Gary Klausner, 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 order dismissing
    Hunt’s bankruptcy appeal. We have jurisdiction under 
    28 U.S.C. §§ 158
    (d) and
    1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with
    a court’s pre-filing order entered against a vexatious litigant. In re Fillbach, 
    223 F.3d 1089
    , 1090-91 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.
    In her opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the district court erred by
    dismissing her bankruptcy appeal for filing the appeal in violation of the district
    court’s pre-filing order. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the district
    court’s order. 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.”).
    Because we affirm the district court’s order dismissing Hunt’s bankruptcy
    appeal, we do not consider her arguments challenging bankruptcy court orders.
    All pending motions are denied.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                    16-55646
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-55646

Citation Numbers: 693 F. App'x 586

Judges: Paez, Bea, Murguia

Filed Date: 7/5/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024