NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUL 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
CLARENCE A. GIPBSIN, AKA Clarence No. 09-15362
Gibson,
D.C. No. 1:00-cv-05381-WMW
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM *
WALKER,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
William M. Wunderlich, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
San Francisco, California
Before: HUG, BEEZER and HALL, Circuit Judges.
Prisoner Clarence Gipbsin appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in
favor of defendant Walker following a jury trial in Gipbsin’s action alleging
*
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).
excessive use of force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we
affirm.
Gipbsin has waived the claims he raises on appeal because he does not show
that he raised them before the district court, nor does he support them with any
analysis, legal argument, citation to authority, or record evidence. To preserve an
issue for appeal, the appellant must show that he raised that issue before the district
court. Tennison v. Circus Circus Enters., Inc., 244 F.3d 684, 689 (9th Cir. 2001).
The appellant must also do more in his briefing than summarily assert that the
district court erred. Sekiya v. Gates, 508 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir. 2007); Indep.
Towers of Wash. v. State of Wash., 350 F.3d 925, 929–30 (9th Cir. 2003).
Here, Gipbsin makes no showing that he raised any of his appellate issues at
trial. Nor does he make any assertions of district court error that are specific
enough for us to review. The issues he raises on appeal are therefore waived.
AFFIRMED.