Popescu v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
Virgil POPESCU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
- Proceeding
- appeal
- Trial court
- United States District Court for the Southern District of California
- Trial judge
- Roger T. Benitez (district judge)
- Outcome
- affirmed — AFFIRMED.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Edward Leavy (author), Susan Graber, Morgan Christen
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 7 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VIRGIL POPESCU, No. 14-56648 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:13-cv-00564-BEN-JLB v. MEMORANDUM* CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 25, 2016** Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Virgil Popescu appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration following the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
* 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). § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Popescu’s motion for reconsideration because Popescu failed to establish any basis for such relief. See id. at 1262-63 (setting forth grounds for reconsideration under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b)).
AFFIRMED.
2 14-56648