Case ID: f-appx_637/html/0387-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jeremy COLTHARP, an individual and Edith Frazier, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Larry HERRERA, in his official capacity as City Clerk for the City of Long Beach, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 15-55039.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted Feb. 11, 2016.
    Filed Feb. 22, 2016.
    Gautam Dutta, Business, Energy, and Election Law, PC, San Jose, CA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
    Monte H. Machit, Long Beach City Attorney’s Office, Long Beach, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: FARRIS, CLIFTON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Jeremy Coltharp and Edith Frazier appeal the district court’s order denying their motion for summary judgment and granting Defendant Larry Herrera’s motion for summary judgment with respect to their substantive due process claim. We affirm.

Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that Herrera arbitrarily interpreted. California Elections Code section 9215 in refusing to certify Plaintiffs’ petition for the next regularly scheduled election. No provision of California law clearly imposes a requirement that a petition requesting submission at a special election be alternatively considered for a general election upon failing to qualify for a special election. After finding Plaintiffs’ petition insufficient for a special election, Herrera followed California Elections Code section 9115(e), which requires that “no action [ ] be taken on the petition.” No due process violation resulted from that approach.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     
      
      . Plaintiffs’ requests for judicial notice are denied for lack of relevance. See Ruiz v. City of Santa Maria, 160 F.3d 543, 548 n. 13 (9th Cir. 1998).