NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 23 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DUSTIN A. LOUIE, No. 18-35424

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00336-TOR v.

MEMORANDUM* FOO, Correction Officer; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Washington

Thomas O. Rice, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 17, 2019** Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Former pretrial detainee Dustin A. Louie appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging excessive force. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

In his opening brief, Louie fails to address how the district court erred in

*

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). granting summary judgment for defendants Foo and Bliven, dismissing his claim against Officer Frantz, or denying his post-judgment motion for reconsideration. Louie has thus 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 18-35424