Oudree S. Ellis v. Eisenman Family Trust;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
OUDREE S. ELLIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
EISENMAN FAMILY TRUST; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-55064
D.C. No. 8:19-cv-02258-DOC-JDE
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 19, 2021**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Oudree S. Ellis appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
her action alleging race discrimination under the Fair Housing Act and other
federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
affirm.
* 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 28 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-55064
The district court did not err by concluding that the stipulation entered
between the parties in the unlawful detainer action was a settlement of the parties’
dispute and preclusive of this action.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Ellis’s motion to
alter or amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) because
Ellis failed to demonstrate any basis for relief. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah
County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth
standard of review and grounds for relief under Rule 59(e)).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --