Kivalu v. Axen Mortgage, LLC

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 1 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT TANIELA F. KIVALU, No. 24-7525 D.C. No. 2:24-cv-02441-KML Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MEMORANDUM* AXEN MORTGAGE, LLC; UNITED WHOLESALE MORTGAGE, LLC; UNKNOWN PARTIES, named as “and others”, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Krissa M. Lanham, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 26, 2026** Before: S.R. THOMAS, MILLER, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

Taniela F. Kivalu appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing Kivalu’s diversity action alleging breach of contract claims. We have

* 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). jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Kivalu’s action because Kivalu failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (explaining that 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)); Thomas v. Montelucia Villas, LLC, 302 P.3d 617, 621 (Ariz. 2013) (en banc) (setting forth the elements of a breach of contract claim under Arizona law).

We reject as unsupported by the record Kivalu’s contentions that the district court was biased against Kivalu or denied him due process.

All pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 24-7525