Gavin B. Davis v. Jason M. Adler;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GAVIN B. DAVIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JASON M. ADLER; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-56168
D.C. No. 3:17-cv-00387-AJB-JLB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Anthony J. Battaglia, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 17, 2019**
Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Gavin B. Davis appeals pro se from the district court’s post-judgment order
rejecting documents submitted for filing in Davis’s action alleging trademark and
privacy claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an
abuse of discretion. Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR Mfg., Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 403-04
* 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 23 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-56168
(9th Cir. 2010). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in exercising its inherent power
to reject documents for filing because they were submitted over one year after the
district court closed Davis’s case. See id. at 404 (district court has inherent power
to control its docket, including power to strike items from the docket); Bias v.
Moynihan, 508 F.3d 1212, 1223 (9th Cir. 2007) (“Broad deference is given to a
district court’s interpretation of its local rules.”).
We do not consider Davis’s contentions concerning his prior appeal in Case
No. 17-56945, which was dismissed for failure to prosecute on April 3, 2018.
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --