Correy Alcantra v. Coyote Valley Band

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 25 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CORREY ALCANTRA, de facto Tribal No. 18-16482
Chairman of the Coyote Valley Band of
Pomo Indians, D.C. No. 3:17-cv-07377-VC
Plaintiff-Appellee,
MEMORANDUM*
v.
COYOTE VALLEY BAND OF POMO
INDIANS; et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Vince Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 22, 2020**
San Francisco, California
Before: W. FLETCHER and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and MOLLOY,***
District Judge.
*
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).
***
The Honorable Donald W. Molloy, United States District Judge for
the District of Montana, sitting by designation.
1
Defendants appeal the denial of sanctions against Plaintiff Correy Alcantra’s
counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. § 1927. We have
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The decision to impose sanctions, whether under Rule 11 or § 1927, is a
matter of discretion for the district court. Cooter & Gell v. Hartmax Corp., 496
U.S. 384, 405 (1990); Salstrom v. Citicorp Credit Servs., Inc., 74 F.3d 183, 185
(9th Cir. 1996). Here, the record shows Alcantra’s attorney withdrew the official
capacity claims against the Tribal Council members and attempted to withdraw the
ICRA and constructive trust claims even before Defendants filed their motion for
sanctions. On these facts, the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining
to impose sanctions.
AFFIRMED.
2