HARRY WILLIBY V. ALPHABET INC., No. 18-17328 (9th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED AUG 27 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HARRY J. WILLIBY, No. Plaintiff-Appellant, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-17328 D.C. No. 3:18-cv-05986-JST v. MEMORANDUM* ALPHABET INC., DBA Blogger, DBA Google Adsense, DBA Google, Inc., DBA YouTube, LLC; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 19, 2019** Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Harry J. Williby appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims in connection with the operation of his YouTube channels. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for * 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). Williby’s request for oral argument, set forth in the opening brief, is denied. an abuse of discretion a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Williby’s action because Williby failed to cure the deficiencies in his complaint, as ordered. See id. at 1260-63 (setting forth factors for determining whether a pro se action should be dismissed under Rule 41(b) and requiring a definite and firm conviction that the trial court committed a clear error of judgment in order to overturn such a dismissal). Williby’s contention that Judge Tigar should have recused himself is unpersuasive. Williby’s motion for judicial notice, or in the alternative, to supplement the record on appeal, is denied as unnecessary. AFFIRMED. 2 18-17328

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.