Shantia Hassanshahi v. Drug Enforcement Admin.

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 03 2019 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SHANTIA HASSANSHAHI, ) No. 17-56508 ) Plaintiff-Appellant, ) D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00377-R-JPR ) v. ) MEMORANDUM* ) DRUG ENFORCEMENT ) ADMINISTRATION; FEDERAL ) BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT ) OF JUSTICE; U.S. DEPARTMENT ) OF HOMELAND SECURITY; ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ) UTTAM DHILLON, in his ) official capacity as Acting DEA ) Administrator; WILLIAM P. BARR, ) Attorney General, in his official ) capacity as Attorney General; KEVIN ) McALEENAN, in his official capacity) as Acting Secretary, Department of ) Homeland Security; CHRISTOPHER ) A. WRAY, Director of the Federal ) Bureau of Investigation; DOES 1-10, ) ) Defendants-Appellees. ) )

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding Submitted June 12, 2019** Pasadena, California Before: FERNANDEZ, WARDLAW, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

Shantia Hassanshahi appeals the district court’s order granting the motion to dismiss1 filed by the United States, United States Drug Enforcement Administration, and others2 (hereafter collectively, DEA). We affirm.

Hassanshahi asserts that the district court abused its discretion when it denied his late motion to extend the filing deadline for his opposition to the motion to dismiss,3 and thereafter treated his failure to file the opposition as consent to the granting of the motion to dismiss.4 We disagree. A motion to extend time after a filing deadline has passed may be granted upon a showing of excusable neglect.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B); see also Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, 391–92, 395, 113 S. Ct. 1489, 1496, 1498, 123 L. Ed. 2d 74 (1993). We agree with the district court that Hassanshahi failed to present a basis that would justify his failure to timely file his motion to extend time. See Petrone v. Veritas Software Corp. (In re Veritas Software Corp. Sec. Litig.), 496 F.3d 962, 973–74 (9th Cir. 2007); Gwaduri v. I.N.S., 362 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir. 2004); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53–54 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam); Kyle v. Campbell Soup Co., 28 F.3d 928, 930 (9th Cir. 1994); cf. Pincay v. Andrews, 389 F.3d 853, 859 (9th Cir. 2004) (en banc). We note, by the way, that Hassanshahi failed to plead claims on which he could prevail.5 AFFIRMED.