NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 30 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT TERI SAHM, No. 22-35490

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:22-cv-00165-JHC v.

MEMORANDUM* SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

John H. Chun, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 15, 2023** Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

Teri Sahm appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging various violations of federal law and the U.S. Constitution. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

*

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). 12(b)(6). Vega v. United States, 881 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th Cir. 2018). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Sahm’s action because Sahm failed to allege facts sufficient to state any 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)); Somers v. Apple, Inc., 729 F.3d 953, 960 (9th Cir. 2013) (determining dismissal “under Rule 12(b)(6) is proper when the complaint either (1) lacks a cognizable legal theory or (2) fails to allege sufficient facts to support a cognizable legal theory”).

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).

We do not consider documents not filed with the district court. See United States v. Elias, 921 F.2d 870, 874 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Documents or facts not presented to the district court are not part of the record on appeal.”).

AFFIRMED.

2 22-35490