Erick Gurule v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS and RECONSTRUCT COMPANY

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ERICK GURULE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS and
RECONSTRUCT COMPANY,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 09-17825
D.C. No. 2:09-cv-01578-JCM-RJJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2010**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Erick Gurule appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his
action arising out of the foreclosure of his property. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of
FILED
DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-17825 2
leave to amend. Smith v. Pac. Props. & Dev. Corp., 358 F.3d 1097, 1100 (9th Cir.
2004). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Gurule leave to
amend where he sought to advance legal theories that had already been properly
rejected. See Chaset v. Fleer/Skybox Int’l, LP, 300 F.3d 1083, 1087-88 (9th Cir.
2002) (no abuse of discretion where amendment would be futile).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --