Opinion
No. 19-16755
11-16-2020
MILLICENT ANDRADE, Plaintiff-Appellant, and ATOOI ALOHA, LLC, by Millicent Andrade and Craig B. Stanley, Its Managing Members; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ABNER GAURINO; et al., Defendants-Appellees, CRAIG B. STANLEY, Counter-defendant-Appellee, v. THE EDMON KELLER AND CLEAVETTE MAE STANLEY FAMILY TRUST, Craig B. Stanley as Trustee (Amended Crossclaim: ECF 239), Cross-defendant-Appellee.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00347-JAO-WRP MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii
Jill Otake, District Judge, Presiding Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Millicent Andrade appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing her securities fraud action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
Andrade failed to include any argument in her opening brief regarding the district court's dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), and thus has waived any challenge to that issue. See McKay v. Ingleson, 558 F.3d 888, 891 n.5 (9th Cir. 2009) (arguments not raised in an appellant's opening brief are waived).
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Andrade's request to continue trial because a continuance on the day of trial would have seriously inconvenienced the court and defendants. United States v. Flynt, 756 F.2d 1352, 1358 (9th Cir. 1985) (setting forth standard and review and factors that the court should consider when reviewing the denial of a request for continuance of trial).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
We reject as meritless Andrade's contention that the district court violated her constitutional rights.
AFFIRMED.