Devra Allen v. Joshua K. Partington;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DEVRA ALLEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JOSHUA K. PARTINGTON; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-56115
D.C. No. 2:20-cv-06793-VAP-JEM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 17, 2021**
Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.
Devra Allen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her
action alleging various federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). Colony Cove Props, LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955
* 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). Allen’s request for oral
argument, set forth in the opening and reply briefs, is denied.
FILED
AUG 25 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-56115
(9th Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Thompson
v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.
Dismissal of Allen’s action was proper because Allen failed to allege facts
sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted)).
We do not consider arguments or allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Allen’s motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --