NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 5 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RODERIC MALCOLM SCHMIDT, No. 13-17653
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 5:13-cv-00986-EJD
v.
MEMORANDUM*
COLDWELL BANKER RESIDENTIAL
BROKERAGE; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees,
MARTIN A. SCHMIDT, Successor
Trustee,
Intervenor-Defendant-
Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Edward J. Davila, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2016**
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
*
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).
Roderic Malcolm Schmidt appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his motion to reopen his diversity action following the dismissal of his
claims pursuant to a settlement agreement. 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 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiff’s motion to
reopen the case because plaintiff failed to demonstrate any grounds for such relief.
See id. at 1262-63 (listing grounds warranting relief from judgment under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b)).
We lack jurisdiction to consider the district court’s order denying plaintiff’s
renewed motion to reopen the case because plaintiff’s amended notice of appeal
was untimely. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii); Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d
572, 585 (9th Cir. 2007).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.
2 13-17653