NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 5 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VICTOR CHARLES FOURSTAR, Jr., No. 19-35030
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:18-cv-00036-SPW
v.
MEMORANDUM*
STEVE BULLOCK; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Susan P. Watters, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 2, 2020**
Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.
Victor Charles Fourstar, Jr., a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se from
the district court’s judgment dismissing his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown
Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), for failure to
state a claim and imposing a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We have
*
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).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
In his opening brief, Fourstar fails to address the grounds for dismissal and
has therefore waived his challenge to the district court’s judgment. See Indep.
Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not
consider any claims that were not actually argued in appellant’s opening brief.”);
Acosta–Huerta v. Estelle, 7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by
argument in pro se appellant’s opening brief are waived); see also Greenwood v.
FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an
appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim[.]”).
To the extent Fourstar contends he was not a prisoner and not subject to the
requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, we reject this contention as
unsupported by the record.
AFFIRMED.
2 19-35030