Louis Nemeth v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Louis Nemeth v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 710 F. App'x 321 (9th Cir. 2018)

Louis Nemeth v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

' Dennis and Terry Kerr appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the Kerrs’ claim for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) because the Kerrs 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 liberally construed, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim); Sanford v. MemberWorks, Inc., 625 F.3d 550, 557 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth elements of a civil RICO claim).

We do not consider matters or claims not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

We do not consider documents not presented to the district court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Reference

Full Case Name
Dennis KERR; Terry Kerr, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
Status
Unpublished