Kim Peck v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, an Ohio corporation

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
KIM PECK,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY,
an Ohio corporation,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 17-35781
D.C. No. 1:14-cv-00500-BLW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Idaho
B. Lynn Winmill, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 12, 2018**
Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Kim Peck appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in her
diversity action arising out of the denial of insurance claims. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Glacier Fish Co. v. Pritzker, 832
F.3d 1113, 1120 (9th Cir. 2016). 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
JUN 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-35781
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Peck’s breach of
contract claim because Peck failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to
whether appellee failed to pay Peck any amount owed under Peck’s insurance
policy. See Miller v. Belknap, 266 P.2d 662, 665 (Idaho 1954) (explaining that
plaintiff bears the burden of proving her right to recover by a preponderance of the
evidence).
We reject as without merit Peck’s contention that the district court was
biased.
Peck’s motion to transmit exhibits (Docket Entry No. 8) is denied as
unnecessary.
Appellee’s motion to strike (Docket Entry No. 34) is denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --