ALEX GUADARRAMA V. SASAN CHADORBAFF, No. 18-56041 (9th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED NOV 22 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ALEX GUADARRAMA; CHRISTIAN GUADARRAMA, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-56041 D.C. No. 8:17-cv-00645-DOC-JDE Plaintiffs-Appellees, MEMORANDUM* v. SASAN CHADORBAFF, DBA Western Motors, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 18, 2019** Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Sasan Chadorbaff, DBA Western Motors, appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) to vacate entry of default and default judgment. We have jurisdiction under * 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). 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We dismiss. On February 28, 2019, this court ordered appellant to order the transcript or digital audio recording of the district court’s June 4, 2018 hearing. See Docket Entry No. 6. To date, appellant has failed to comply with the order. Due to appellant’s failure to include the relevant transcript in the record on appeal, we dismiss this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2) (if appellant intends to challenge a finding or conclusion as unsupported by the evidence, appellant must include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to that finding or conclusion); Syncom Capital Corp. v. Wade, 924 F.2d 167, 169-70 (9th Cir. 1991) (dismissing appeal by pro se appellant for failure to provide relevant trial transcripts); Portland Feminist Women’s Health Center v. Advocates for Life, Inc., 877 F.2d 787, 789 (9th Cir. 1989) (declining to consider argument that district court erred due to failure to provide transcript of contempt hearing). DISMISSED. 2 18-56041

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.