Case ID: br_574/html/0601-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

IN RE: Robert W. HUNT, M.D., a Medical Corporation, Debtor. Peli Popovich Hunt, Appellant, v. David M. Goodrich, Chapter 7 Trustee; Peter C. Anderson, United States Trustee, Appellees.
    No. 16-55679
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted June 26, 2017 
    
    Filed July 5, 2017
    Peli Popovich Hunt, Pro Se
    David Gould, Esquire, Gould & Gould LLP, Calabasas, CA, for Appellee David M. Goodrich
    Hatty Yip, Dare Law, Trial Attorney, Office of the U.S. Trustee, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellee Peter C. Anderson
    Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges,
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Peli Popovich Hunt appeals pro se from the district court’s orders denying her post-judgment motions “for rulings on leave to file as a vexatious litigant and return of bonds,” to disqualify the chapter 7 trustee, and for reconsideration, We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 158(d) and 1291. We affirm,

In the opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the district court erred in denying her motions. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the district court’s orders. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[0]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 review only issues which are argued specifically and distinctly in a party’s opening brief.”).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publi cation and is not precedent except as provid ed by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.