Opinion
No. 17-16090
04-17-2018
TOBY M. SEMICK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-02462-JAM-EFB MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
California state prisoner Toby M. Semick appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
In his opening brief, Semick fails to address how the district court erred by dismissing his action for failing to prosecute following the district court's order to file an amended complaint. As a result, Semick has waived his challenge to the district court's order. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[O]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived."); Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) ("We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant . . . .").
Semick's motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 13) is denied.
AFFIRMED.