George A. Saba v. Craig R. Lareau;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GEORGE A. SABA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CRAIG R. LAREAU; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-56575
D.C. No. 5:18-cv-02366-SVW-JEM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 15, 2019**
Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
George A. Saba appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying him in
forma pauperis status and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal
and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for
an abuse of discretion the denial of in forma pauperis status. O’Loughlin v. Doe,
* 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 22 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-56575
920 F.2d 614, 616 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Saba’s in forma
pauperis status and dismissing this action for the reasons stated in the November
13, 2018 order.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on
appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --