FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 04 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROY SUDDUTH, No. 09-56755
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:08-cv-03455-PSG-CW
v.
MEMORANDUM *
JERRY BULOSAN; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Roy Sudduth appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action alleging violations of the Fair Housing Act. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of
a motion for reconsideration. Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. ACandS, Inc., Multnomah Cnty.,
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Or., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Sudduth’s “Motion
to Vacate All of Judge Gutierrez and Magistrate [Judge] Woehrle’s Ex-Parte
Orders of Court,” because Sudduth has set forth no basis for reconsideration. See
id. at 1263 (listing grounds for reconsidering earlier ruling).
Sudduth’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
We do not consider whether the district court abused its discretion by
dismissing Sudduth’s action based on his failure to appear at a scheduled final
pretrial conference and failure to cooperate, because Sudduth makes no argument
on appeal regarding this issue. See Miller v. Fairchild Indus., Inc., 797 F.2d 727,
738 (9th Cir. 1986).
AFFIRMED.
2 09-56755