Case ID: f-appx_460/html/0622-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Steve CASTRO, Plaintiff-counter-claimant—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant—Appellee, and Shirley J. Veatch, Third-party-defendant.
    No. 09-17427.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 18, 2011.
    
    Filed Nov. 29, 2011.
    Steve Martin Williard, Esquire, The Wil-liard Law Firm PC, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-counter-claimant-Appellant.
    Carol Barthel, Esquire, Steven P. Johnson, Curtis C. Smith, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Steve Martin Williard, Esquire, for Third-party-defendant.
    
      Before: FARRIS, NOONAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Steve Castro appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States. The parties are familiar with the facts underlying the appeal and thus we do not include them here.

The district court’s failure to accord a hearing on a motion for summary judgment was not legal error in light of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78 and the District of Arizona Local Rules of Civil Procedure which state that no response to the motion for summary judgment is equivalent to consenting to the motion, see Local Rule 7.2(i), and that no hearing is required where no request is made for such a hearing, see Local Rule 7.2(f).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.