Patsy N. Sakuma v. Association of Apartment Owners of the Tropics at Waikele, an incorporated…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PATSY N. SAKUMA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT
OWNERS OF THE TROPICS AT
WAIKELE, an incorporated association, by
its board of directors; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-16791
D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00274-DKW-
KJM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii
Derrick Kahala Watson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Patsy N. Sakuma appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing her action alleging Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
(“RICO”) and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
* 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
DEC 21 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-16791
review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341
F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003). We may affirm on any basis supported by the
record, Thomson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.
Dismissal of Sakuma’s action was proper because Sakuma failed to allege
facts sufficient to state a plausible RICO claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338,
341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, a
plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for
relief); Living Designs, Inc. v. E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co., 431 F.3d 353, 361
(9th Cir. 2005) (elements of a civil RICO claim).
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
Sakuma’s motion to file supplemental excerpts of record (Docket Entry No.
40) is granted and the docket reflects that the supplemental excerpts of record have
been filed. All other pending requests and motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --