NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 7 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VIRGIL POPESCU, No. 14-56648
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:13-cv-00564-BEN-JLB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 25, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Virgil Popescu appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his
motion for reconsideration following the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah
Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Popescu’s motion
for reconsideration because Popescu failed to establish any basis for such
relief. See id. at 1262-63 (setting forth grounds for reconsideration under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b)).
AFFIRMED.
2 14-56648