Terry Kerr; Dennis Kerr v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TERRY KERR; DENNIS KERR,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-36026
D.C. No. 4:18-cv-00146-DCN
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
David C. Nye, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 21, 2019**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and FRIEDLAND and BENNETT, Circuit
Judges.
Terry Kerr and Dennis Kerr appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Cervantes v.
* 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).
FILED
MAY 30 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-36026
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed the Kerrs’ action because the Kerrs
failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim for relief. See Hebbe v.
Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are
liberally construed, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible
claim); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“A claim has facial
plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw
the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. See
United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not
presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --