United States v. 2020-04-10 | 19-35773 | BRENDA JOHNSON V. WASH. STATE DEPT OF TRANSP. | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BRENDA M. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, AKA WSDOT;
PATTY RUBSTELLO, P.E., Director of
Toll Operations WSDOT,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 19-35773

D.C. No. 2:19-cv-00862-RSM

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020
**

Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Brenda M. Johnson appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her action alleging federal claims arising from her employment at the
Washington State Department of Transportation. We have jurisdiction under 28

*
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

APR 10 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

2 19-35773
U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
In her opening brief, Johnson fails to address the grounds for dismissal and
has therefore waived her challenge to the district court’s orders. See Indep. Towers
of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not
consider any claims that were not actually argued in appellant’s opening brief.”);
Acosta–Huerta v. Estelle, 7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by
argument in pro se appellant’s opening brief are waived); see also Greenwood v.
FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an
appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim[.]”).
AFFIRMED.