William H. Gilliam v. MIKE GALVIN, AKA J. Michael Galvin;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
WILLIAM H. GILLIAM,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MIKE GALVIN, AKA J. Michael Galvin; et
al.,
Defendants-Appellees,
and
AIRBNB, INC.; AIRBNB PAYMENTS,
INC.,
Defendants.
No. 20-15308
D.C. No. 1:19-cv-00127-JAO-RT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Jill Otake, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 14, 2021**
Before: PAEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
* 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). Gilliam’s request for oral
argument, set forth in his briefs, is denied.
FILED
SEP 21 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-15308
William H. Gilliam appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging Lanham Act and state law claims. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to
state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Cervantes v.
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Gilliam’s Lanham Act false advertising
claim because Gilliam failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim.
See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B); Ariix, LLC v. NutriSearch Corp., 985 F.3d 1107,
1114-15 (9th Cir. 2021) (defining false advertising claim under Lanham Act and
setting forth required elements of “commercial advertising or promotion” for such
a claim).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --