NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 22 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DARRU K. “KEN” HSU, Individually and No. 14-15588
as Trustee of the Darru K. Hsu and Gina T.
Hsu Living Trust U/AO5/O5/03; D.C. No. 3:11-cv-02076-WHA
individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,
MEMORANDUM*
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2016**
Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Darru K. “Ken” Hsu appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
*
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).
60(d)(3). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of
discretion, United States v. Estate of Stonehill, 660 F.3d 415, 443 (9th Cir. 2011),
and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hsu relief from the
judgment because Hsu failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that
defendant perpetrated a “fraud on the court.” Pizzuto v. Ramirez, 783 F.3d 1171,
1181 (9th Cir. 2015) (requiring more specific evidence of fraud than plaintiff’s
“series of allegations and implications”). We reject as without merit Hsu’s
contention that the district court applied the wrong legal standard. See id. (“The
burden of proof rests with petitioner to show the fraud by clear and convincing
evidence.”).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 14-15588