NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 27 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MAZEN ARAKJI, No. 18-16587
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:18-cv-03192-VC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
GOODWILL OF SILICON VALLEY,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Vince Chhabria, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Mazen Arakji appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action alleging federal and state law employment claims. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal of an
*
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).
action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(i). Denton v. Hernandez, 504
U.S. 25, 33 (1992). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Arakji’s action as
frivolous because his damages request of $155 billion was unsupported by Arakji’s
claims. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-16587