Anthony Chrisanthis v. Brian Cason;

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ANTHONY CHRISANTHIS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BRIAN CASON; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-15028
D.C. No. 3:08-cv-02472-WHA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Anthony Chrisanthis appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action alleging that defendants retaliated against him for reporting unsafe
workplace conditions in violation of the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) and
FILED
JUN 07 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-15028 2
other laws . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo,
Mangano v. United States, 529 F.3d 1243, 1245 n.2 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Chrisanthis’s FTCA claims because
defendants’ alleged retaliatory conduct fell within the scope of the Civil Service
Reform Act’s prohibited personnel practices, and thus his claims were preempted.
See id. at 1246.
We do not consider issues that were not raised in Chrisanthis’s opening
brief. See Friends of Yosemite Valley v. Kempthorne, 520 F.3d 1024, 1033 (9th
Cir. 2008) (arguments not raised by a party in the opening brief are deemed
abandoned).
Chrisanthis’s contention regarding the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s
representation of defendants Cason and Spivey is unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --