DEVRA ALLEN V. JOSHUA PARTINGTON, No. 20-56115 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 25 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEVRA ALLEN, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 20-56115 Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D.C. No. 2:20-cv-06793-VAP-JEM MEMORANDUM* JOSHUA K. PARTINGTON; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Virginia A. Phillips, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 17, 2021** Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges. Devra Allen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging various federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Colony Cove Props, LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948, 955 * 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). Allen’s request for oral argument, set forth in the opening and reply briefs, is denied. (9th Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm. Dismissal of Allen’s action was proper because Allen failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. 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)). We do not consider arguments or allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009). Allen’s motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 16) is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 20-56115

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.