U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2022

Nathan Byerly v. Ada County

Nathan Byerly v. Ada County
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided July 20, 2022

Nathan Byerly v. Ada County

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 20 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATHAN B. BYERLY, No. 20-35046 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:19-cv-00229-DCN v. MEMORANDUM* ADA COUNTY; ADA COUNTY COURT CLERK; ADA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER; ADA COUNTY COURT; STATE OF IDAHO FOURTH DISTRICT; ADA COUNTY PROSECUTOR OFFICE, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho David C. Nye, Chief District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 12, 2022** Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

Idaho state prisoner Nathan B. Byerly appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging denial of access to the

* 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). courts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Byerly’s action because Byerly failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343, 349-53 (1996) (elements of an access-to-courts claim); Castro v. County of Los Angeles, 833 F.3d 1060, 1073-76 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (discussing requirements to establish municipal liability under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978)); 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).

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

AFFIRMED.

2 20-35046

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.