Horace Gozon Friend v. United States Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HORACE GOZON FRIEND,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 21-35866
D.C. No. 3:21-cv-05566-JLR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
James L. Robart, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 8, 2022**
Before: WALLACE, TALLMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Horace Gozon Friend appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action alleging federal claims. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir.
* 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
DEC 15 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-35866
2012). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Friend’s action because Friend failed to
allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338,
341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, a
plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for
relief); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“A claim has facial
plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw
the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for misconduct alleged.”);
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (“To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff
must . . . show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under
color of state law.”); Consejo de Desarrollo Economico de Mexicali, A.C. v.
United States, 482 F.3d 1157, 1173 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[A] Bivens action can be
maintained against a defendant in his or her individual capacity only, and not in his
or her official capacity.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Friend’s motions regarding “notice of party listing errors” and “U.S.
Constitution violations” are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --