Arabella Lemus v. PAUL SINGH MADAR, Objector -

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARABELLA LEMUS,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PAUL SINGH MADAR,
Objector - Appellant,
v.
H&R BLOCK ENTERPRISES, INC., a
Missouri corporation,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 13-16628
D.C. No. 3:09-cv-03179-SI
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 17, 2015**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
Paul Singh Madar appeals pro se from the district court’s order disallowing
FILED
FEB 27 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

his claim against a class action settlement fund. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. In re Gypsum Antitrust
Cases, 565 F.2d 1123, 1128 (9th Cir. 1977). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by disallowing Madar’s claim
to a portion of the settlement where Madar’s claim was not timely received, and
Madar “made no showing that [his] claim was treated in a fashion inconsistent with
those of other claimants similarly situated.” Id. (“In reviewing the court’s exercise
of its discretion, we are not to substitute our ideas of fairness for those of the
district judge in the absence of evidence that [she] acted arbitrarily[.]” (citation and
internal quotation marks omitted)).
AFFIRMED.
13-16628 2

-- 2 of 2 --