NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 25 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEVRA ALLEN, No. 20-56115

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:20-cv-06793-VAP-JEM v.

MEMORANDUM* JOSHUA K. PARTINGTON; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 17, 2021** Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

Devra Allen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging various federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Colony Cove Props, LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955

*

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). Allen’s request for oral argument, set forth in the opening and reply briefs, is denied. (9th Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

Dismissal of Allen’s action was proper because Allen failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider arguments or allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Allen’s motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 20-56115