United States v. 2020-06-10 | 19-35421 | LYLE COULTAS V. CARROLL TICHENOR | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |

19-35421United States Court Of Appeals For The 9th Circuit10 de jun. de 2020

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LYLE MARK COULTAS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CARROLL TICHENOR, Individually and
in his Official Capacity as a Yamhill County
Prosecutor; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 19-35421

D.C. No. 3:19-cv-00021-HZ

MEMORANDUM
*

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Oregon
Marco A. Hernandez, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 2, 2020
**

Before: LEAVY, PAEZ, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Lyle Mark Coultas appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging fraud on the court. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s

*
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

JUN 10 2020

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

2 19-35421
dismissal on the basis of res judicata. Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp., 297 F.3d 953, 956
(9th Cir. 2002). 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 Coultas’s action to set aside a prior judgment for fraud on the
court was proper because Coultas failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim.
See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se
pleadings are to be liberally construed, a plaintiff must still present factual
allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief); see also Appling v. State
Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 340 F.3d 769, 780 (9th Cir. 2003) (“Fraud on the court
requires a grave miscarriage of justice.” (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted)).
We reject as unsupported by the record Coultas’s contentions regarding
judicial misconduct.
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.