Patsy Sakuma v. Ass'n of Apartment Owners

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 26 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PATSY N. SAKUMA, No. 19-16615 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00274-DKW- KJM v. ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT MEMORANDUM* OWNERS OF THE TROPICS AT WAIKELE, an incorporated association, by its board of directors; et al., Defendants-Appellees, and LOVE, YAMAMOTO & REVERE, LLP, a limited liability law partnership; YAMAMOTO & REVERE, LLP, a liability law partnership, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 20, 2021** * 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). Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Patsy N. Sakuma appeals pro se from the district court’s post-judgment orders in her action alleging Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Sakuma’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion for relief from judgment, or by denying leave to file a motion for reconsideration, because Sakuma failed to demonstrate any basis for the requested relief. See id. (setting forth grounds for relief under Rule 59(e) or 60(b)); see also Latshaw v. Trainer Wortham & Co., 452 F.3d 1097, 1102-04 (9th Cir. 2006) (explaining that Rule 60(b)(6) relief may be granted only where extraordinary circumstances are present). We do not consider Sakuma’s contentions concerning her prior appeal (Case No. 16-16791). Sakuma’s request for judicial notice, set forth in her opening brief, is denied as unnecessary. AFFIRMED. 2 19-16615