Isaiah Hoover v. Swift Transportation Company;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ISAIAH HOOVER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SWIFT TRANSPORTATION COMPANY;
et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 20-16088
D.C. No. 2:18-cv-03314-JAT
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 8, 2021**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
Isaiah Hoover appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from his employment as a
student driver. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 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
NOV 12 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 20-16088
In his opening brief, Hoover fails to address the grounds for dismissal and
has therefore waived his challenge to the district court’s orders. See Indep. Towers
of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not
consider any claims that were not actually argued in appellant’s opening brief.”);
Acosta–Huerta v. Estelle, 7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by
argument in pro se appellant’s opening brief are waived); see also Greenwood v.
FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an
appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim[.]”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --