MEMORANDUM ***

Vyacheslav Astakhov appeals the district court’s orders entering default and default judgment, forfeiting to the United States real estate that was the proceeds of bankruptcy fraud. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

1. The court properly granted the Government’s application for default before granting default judgment. In making each decision, the court considered Astakhov’s relevant briefs.

2. Because his Opening Brief effectively ignores the district court’s finding that Astakhov’s culpable conduct led to the default, Astakhov waived any challenge to the finding. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999). In any event, the culpable-conduct finding is not clearly erroneous. See Alan Neuman Prods., Inc. v. Albright, 862 F.2d 1388, 1391 (9th Cir. 1988). The court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief from default or default judgment on that ground alone. See United States v. Signed Pers. Check No. 730 of Yubran S. Mesle, 615 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir. 2010).

3. The Request for Judicial Notice is denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.