Opinion
No. 14-17135
11-23-2016
WYLMINA ELIZABETH HETTINGA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TIMOTHY P. LOUMENA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 5:13-cv-02217-RMW MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Ronald M. Whyte, District Judge, Presiding Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Wylmina Elizabeth Hettinga appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising from her state court divorce proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm.
We affirm the district court's dismissal because Hettinga failed to raise any argument in her opening brief concerning the district court's ground for dismissal, and has therefore waived her appeal of the district court's judgment. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[A]rguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.").
We do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.