Bruce Westin v. City of Calabasas

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BRUCE WESTIN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CITY OF CALABASAS,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 21-55834
D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00782-GW-JPR
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 12, 2022**
Before: SCHROEDER, R. NELSON, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Bruce Westin appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action regarding defendant’s regulation of household sewage
systems. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the
district court’s dismissal for lack of standing under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
* 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
JUL 18 2022
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-55834
12(b)(1). Meland v. Weber, 2 F.4th 838, 843 (9th Cir. 2021). We may affirm on
any basis supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59
(9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.
Dismissal of Westin’s action was proper because Westin failed to allege
facts sufficient to establish that defendant’s failure to regulate other homeowners’
sewage systems violated Westin’s constitutional rights. See Shanks v. Dressel, 540
F.3d 1082, 1087 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[T]he state’s failure to protect an individual
from harms inflicted by persons not acting under color of law will not ordinarily
give rise to § 1983 liability.” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised in the
opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --