N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT KR ISHNA REDDY, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. W EB M EDX, INC .; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 12-56602 D.C . No. 2:12-c v-02406-C AS-JC M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia C hristina A. Sny de r, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d July 22, 2014 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, C ANB Y, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s . Krishna R e ddy a ppe a ls pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s orde r dism issing he r e m ploy m e nt a c tion a lle ging fe de ra l a nd sta te la w for disc rim ination, re t a lia tion, and wrongful te rm ination on the ba sis of a ve x atious litiga

n t orde r issue d a ga inst he r in a prior a c tion in 2003 (the

“ 2003 Ve xatious Litiga

nt Orde r” ). W e have 

# F IL ED JUL 31 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. M o y v . Unite d State

s , 906 F.2d 467, 469-70 (9th C ir. 1990) (jurisdic tion e xists to re vie w a pre -filing orde r be fore any ple a ding is re je c te d unde r it be c a

use it is “ a kind of injunc tion whic h a ffe c ts the rights of litiga nts” ). W e re v ie w for an a buse of disc re tion, id. at 469, a nd we a ffirm . In a pre vious a

ppe a l , this c ourt a ffirm e d the distric t c ourt’ s im position of the 2003 Ve xatious Litiga

nt Orde r a ga inst R e d dy , re quiring he r to post a $5,000 bond and to obtain the distric t c ourt’ s pe rm ission be fore filing a ny future a c tions a ga inst any de fe nda nt in the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia . Se e Re ddy v . Stotle r , No. 03-56283, 114 F. App’ x 905 (9th C ir. De c . 10, 2004). B e c a use R e ddy

fa ile d to post bond or to obta

in the distric t c ourt’ s pe rm i ssion be fore filing this ac tion in c om plia nc e with the2003 Ve xatious Litiga nt Orde r, the distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re t ion by

dism issing the

a c tion without pre

judic e . C f. In re Fillbac h , 223 F.3d 1089, 1090-91 (9th C ir. 2000) (a ffirm ing dismissa l of a pe tition file d in distric t c o urt to try

to c irc um

v e nt the ba

nkruptc y c o urt’ s ve xatious litiga

nt orde r). The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion by

de ny i ng R e ddy ’ s m o tions for re c onside ration, for a

tra nsfe r of the a c tion to the

Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia , a

n d for disqua lific ation of a ll but oneof the judge s of the C e n tra l Distric t of C a lifornia be c a use R e ddy

fa ile d to e sta

blish grounds for such re lie f. Se e C .D. C a l. R . 7-18 (m o tion for re c onside ra tion); Sc h. Dist. N o. 1J , Multnomah 1 2 - 5 6 6 0 2 2C

nty ., Or. v . AC

andS, Inc . , 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th C ir. 1993) (se tting forth sta nda rd of re vie w a

nd fa c tors for re c onside ra t ion unde r Fe de ra l R ule s of C ivil Proc e d ure 59(e ) and 60(b)); se e also J one s v . GN C Franc hising, Inc ., 211 F.3d 495, 498-99 (9th C ir. 2000) (se tting forth sta nda rd of re v ie w a

nd fa c tors for transfe r of an a c tion for im prope r ve nue ); V

oigt v . Sav e ll , 70 F.3d 1552, 1565 (9th C ir. 1995) (se tting forth sta nda rd of re vie w a

nd fa c tors wa

rranting disqua

lific ation of a judge unde r 28 U.S.C . § 455). W e re je c t R e ddy ’ s c onte ntions re g arding there c usa l of a ll “ R e public an Pre side nt-nom inate d” judge s on this c ourt a n d distric t c ourt judge s who a re a lle ge dly bia se d a g a inst he r; the a lle ge d non-e xiste n c e of the 2003 Ve xatious Litiga nt Orde r; the inva lidity of va rious prior ve x atious litiga n t orde rs a ga inst he r; de fe nda n ts’ a lle g e d inte ntiona l m isre pre se ntation of thefa c ts a nd the la w in this a c tion; a nd the re a ssignm e nt of this a c tion to a diffe re nt distric t c ourt judge . AFFIRM E D .

1 2 - 5 6 6 0 2 3