LAMONT JOHNSON V. WACHOVIA BANK FSB, No. 12-17393 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 30 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LAMONT JOHNSON, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 12-17393 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:10-cv-02839-GEBCKD v. WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.; et al., MEMORANDUM* Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Garland E. Burrell, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Submitted January 18, 2017** Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. Lamont Johnson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims related to the foreclosure of his properties. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a denial of a motion for leave to file an amended complaint. See * 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). Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Johnson’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint because the proposed amendments would have been futile. See Gardner v. Martino, 563 F.3d 981, 990, 992 (9th Cir. 2009) (no abuse of discretion in denying leave to amend where the proposed amendment would be futile). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim . . . .”). We reject as without merit Johnson’s contentions that the district court demonstrated bias and failed to afford him sufficient time to submit a proposed second amended complaint. Johnson’s request for judicial notice, filed on April 2, 2013, is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 12-17393

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.