Richard Lee Green v. Dinh Hoang Phuong

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICHARD LEE GREEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DINH HOANG PHUONG,
Defendant-Appellee.
No. 22-35279
D.C. No. 3:21-cv-00261-JMK
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Joshua M. Kindred, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 15, 2023**
Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.
Richard Lee Green appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action under the Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980,
T.I.A.S. No. 11670, S. Treaty Doc. No. 99-11 (“Convention”), as implemented by
* 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
AUG 30 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 22-35279
the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 22 U.S.C. §§ 9001, et seq. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. Team Equip.,
Inc., 741 F.3d 1082, 1086 (9th Cir. 2014). We may affirm on any basis supported
by the record. Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008). We
affirm.
Dismissal of Green’s action was proper because Green did not allege facts
sufficient to show that his children were “habitually resident in a Contracting
State” because Indonesia is not a Convention signatory. See Convention, Art. 4
(providing that the Convention applies “to any child who was habitually resident in
a Contracting State immediately before any breach of custody or access rights”);
U.S. Hague Convention Treaty Partners, Travel.State.Gov, https://travel.state.gov/
content/travel/en/International-Parental-Child-Abduction/abductions/hague-
abduction-country-list.html (listing contracting states to the Convention).
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).
All pending motions and requests are denied.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --