Case ID: f-appx_81/html/0931-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Patsy N. SAKUMA, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF THE TROPICS AT WAIKELE; et al., Defendants—Appellees.
    No. 03-15522.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 10, 2003.
    
    Decided Nov. 20, 2003.
    Patsy N. Sakuma, pro se, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Kevin P. Sumida, Esq., Marilyn S.H. Naitoh, Esq., Matsui, Chung, Sumida & Tsuchiyama, Sidney K. Ayabe, Esq., Ayabe, Chong, Nishimoto Sia & Nakamura, Dennis M. Lombardi, Esq., Case, Bigelow & Lombardi, Honolulu, HI, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: KOZINSKI, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Patsy N. Sakuma appeals pro se the district court’s judgment dismissing pursuant to a settlement agreement her action alleging the Association of Apartment Owners of the Tropics at Waikele and others violated various federal statutes, including the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s enforcement of a settlement agreement for abuse of discretion, Doi v. Halekulani Corp., 276 F.3d 1131, 1136 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

The district court properly enforced the settlement between Sakuma and the defendants because Sakuma acknowledged in open court that the parties had resolved all “key” terms. See Doi 276 F.3d at 1137-39.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Sakuma’s post-judgment motion for reconsideration because Sakuma did not present newly-discovered evidence, demonstrate clear error, or show an intervening change in controlling law. See Weeks v. Bayer, 246 F.3d 1231, 1236 (9th Cir.2001).

Sakuma’s remaining contentions also lack merit.

We deny Sakuma’s motion for reconsideration.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.