Pedro Rodriguez v. MATT GRECO, District Attorney;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PEDRO RODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MATT GRECO, District Attorney; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-55091
D.C. No. 3:15-cv-02153-BEN-
BGS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 11, 2017**
Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Pedro Rodriguez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising
out of criminal proceedings against him. 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
JUL 17 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-55091
In Rodriguez’s opening brief, Rodriguez failed to address any of the grounds
for dismissal, and has therefore waived his challenge to the district court’s order.
See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003)
(“[W]e review only issues which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s
opening brief.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); 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).
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).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --