Anita Washington v. Abecassis Management;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANITA WASHINGTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ABECASSIS MANAGEMENT; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-56514
D.C. No. 2:18-cv-07689-PSG-GJS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 15, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Anita Washington appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
reconsideration of the district court’s order dismissing Washington’s 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 action alleging due process and equal protection violations arising out of
her eviction from her apartment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
* 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
JUL 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-56514
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 Washington’s
motion for reconsideration because Washington 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)).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --