Daniel M. Sandoval v. United States Department of the Army; Army Board Correction of Military Records

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DANIEL M. SANDOVAL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
THE ARMY; ARMY BOARD
CORRECTION OF MILITARY
RECORDS,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-36027
D.C. No. 3:17-cv-05034-RBL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Daniel M. Sandoval appeals pro se from the district court’s summary
judgment in his action challenging the Army Board for Correction of Military
Records’s (“ABCMR”) denial of Sandoval’s application for correction of his
* 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).
FILED
AUG 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-36027
military record. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo
the district court’s decision on cross-motions for summary judgment. Guatay
Christian Fellowship v. County of San Diego, 670 F.3d 957, 970 (9th Cir. 2011).
We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants
because Sandoval failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether
the ABCMR’s decision to deny his application was arbitrary, capricious, or not
supported by substantial evidence. See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2); Guerrero v. Stone, 970
F.2d 626, 628 (9th Cir. 1992) (setting forth standard governing judicial review of
ABCMR decisions).
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).
Sandoval’s motion to supplement the record (Docket Entry No. 14) is
denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --