Alberto Soler-Somohano v. Federal Housing Finance Agency, et al

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 22-12776
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
In re: ALBERTO SOLER SOMOHANO,
Debtor.
______________________________________________
ALBERTO SOLER-SOMOHANO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY,
GOVERNMENT SPONSOR ENTERPRISE,
FANNIE MAE,
KONDAUR CAPITAL LLC,
MICHAEL HANZMAN, et al.,
USCA11 Case: 22-12776 Document: 52-1 Date Filed: 02/08/2024 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

2 Opinion of the Court 22-12776
Defendants-Appellees.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 1:21-cv-23235-MGC,
Bkcy No. 1:21-bk-01057-AJC
____________________
Before WILSON, J ORDAN, and L AGOA , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Alberto Solar,1 proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s
dismissal of his appeal of a bankruptcy court’s dismissal of an ad-
versary proceeding.
We ordinarily review a district court’s dismissal for want of
prosecution for abuse of discretion. Morewitz v. W. of Eng. Ship
Owners Mut. Prot. & Indem. Ass’n, 62 F.3d 1356, 1366 (11th Cir.
1995). However, issues not raised in an appellant’s initial brief are
deemed abandoned and will not be addressed absent extraordinary
circumstances. United States v. Campbell, 26 F.4th 860, 871–72 (11th
Cir. 2022) (en banc). “A party fails to adequately brief a claim when
he does not plainly and prominently raise it.” Sapuppo v. Allstate
1 While the appellant’s surname has been listed as “Soler-Somohano” and “So-
lar‑Somohano” in certain filings, this opinion refers to him as “Solar,” con-
sistent with the name he uses in his brief.
USCA11 Case: 22-12776 Document: 52-1 Date Filed: 02/08/2024 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

22-12776 Opinion of the Court 3
Floridian Ins. Co., 739 F.3d 678, 681 (11th Cir. 2014) (quotation
marks omitted). Importantly, we have “long held that an appellant
abandons a claim when he either makes only passing references to
it or raises it in a perfunctory manner without supporting argu-
ments and authority.” Id. “Pro se pleadings are held to a less strin-
gent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, there-
fore, be liberally construed.” Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d
1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). Yet an issue not briefed
on appeal by a pro se litigant—even when liberally construed—is
still deemed abandoned. Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th
Cir. 2008) (per curiam).
Here, Solar has abandoned on appeal the issue of whether
the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his case for lack
of prosecution. His brief challenges the Federal Housing Finance
Agency’s validity as a party-appellee and raises unsubstantiated al-
legations regarding the bankruptcy judge’s competency in the un-
derlying case. Even with the benefit of liberal construction, Solar
does not present arguments on appeal addressing the district
court’s dismissal of his case, or its rationale in support thereof. Ac-
cordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
USCA11 Case: 22-12776 Document: 52-1 Date Filed: 02/08/2024 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --