Haley Daria v. Sapient Corp.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 20 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HALEY DARIA, No. 21-16480

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:21-cv-02712-WHA v.

MEMORANDUM* SAPIENT CORP., acquirer of intellectual properties of World Wide Web Associates, a CA LLC; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California William Alsup, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 11, 2022**

Before: McKEOWN, CHRISTEN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Haley Daria appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal

*

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

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Daria’s action because Daria failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. 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 matters 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).

Daria’s motions to file a supplemental reply brief (Docket Entry Nos. 46 and 47) are granted.

Daria’s request for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 51) is denied. AFFIRMED.

2 21-16480