Naufahu v. Tait
Naufahu v. Tait
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 23 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TALANOA T. NAUFAHU, No. 23-4129 D.C. No. 3:20-cv-00048-SLG Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM* ROBINSON TAIT, P.S.; JOE A.P. SOLSENG; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES; NORIKO COLSTON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska Sharon L. Gleason, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 22, 2025**
Before: GRABER, H.A. THOMAS, and JOHNSTONE, Circuit Judges.
Talanoa T. Naufahu appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying
his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) motion for relief from judgment in his
* 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). wrongful foreclosure action alleging federal and state law claims. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Navajo
Nation v. Dep’t of the Interior, 876 F.3d 1144, 1173 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Naufahu’s Rule
60(b)(6) motion because Naufahu failed to demonstrate any basis for relief. See id.
(“Rule 60(b) relief should be granted sparingly . . . and only where extraordinary
circumstances prevented a party from taking timely action to prevent or correct an
erroneous judgment.” (emphasis omitted) (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
We do not consider 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 23-4129
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished