OLIVIA MORA V. EILEEN ELY, No. 13-36092 (9th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED OCT 29 2015 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT OLIVIA MORA, No. 13-36092 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:12-cv-02134-JCC v. MEMORANDUM* EILEEN ELY, President of Green River Community College, et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 14, 2015** Before: SILVERMAN, BERZON, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. Olivia Mora appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising from defendants’ recommendation that she withdraw from an aviation class and reconsider her career path. We have jurisdiction under * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 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 review de novo a dismissal on the basis of the applicable statute of limitations. Mann v. Am. Airlines, 324 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2003). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm. Dismissal of Mora’s action with prejudice was proper because it was timebarred, and Mora failed to show that she was entitled to any tolling. See Bagley v. CMC Real Estate Corp., 923 F.2d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 1991) (limitations period for § 1983 action is three years under Washington state law); Perez v. Garcia, 198 P.3d 539, 545 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009) (explaining equitable tolling under Washington law). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). AFFIRMED. 2 13-36092

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.