United States v. 2020-04-13 | 19-16963 | IKEMEFULA IBEABUCHI V. EGGLESTON | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

19-16963United States Court Of Appeals For The 9th CircuitApr 13, 2020

Full text

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IKEMEFULA CHARLES IBEABUCHI,
AKA Charles Ikemefula Ibeabuchi,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

EGGLESTON, Director of Operation,
FOIA/PA, Missouri Branch; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 19-16963

D.C. No. 2:17-cv-04750-JAT-JZB

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020
**

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

Arizona state prisoner Ikemefula Charles Ibeabuchi, AKA Charles
Ikemefula Ibeabuchi, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims arising out 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

APR 13 2020

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

2 19-16963
immigration detention and his request for documents under the Freedom of
Information Act. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
In his opening brief, Ibeabuchi fails to address how the district court erred
by dismissing his action for failure to state a claim. As a result, Ibeabuchi has
waived his challenge to the district court’s order. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d
1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its
opening brief are deemed waived.”); Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th
Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant . . . .”).
We reject as meritless Ibeabuchi’s contentions that the district court clerk’s
description of his motion to reopen the time to appeal was erroneous and that the
district court should have granted him leave to amend sua sponte.
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.