NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAIF KHORSHED,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. PAULA ADAMS, LAWA Director of Human Resources, an individual ; JOSEPH Y. AVRAHAMY, Attorney at Law, an individual, Defendants

- Appellees. No. 15

- 55165 D.C. No. 2:14

- cv - 03435

- GW

- JPR

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 25, 2016 ** Before: LEAVY, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Saif Khorshed appeals pro se from the district court’ s judgment dismissing his employment action alleging violations of Title VII, the Americans with

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

NOV 7 2016 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 55165

Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) , an d various other claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Landers v. Quality Commc’ns, Inc ., 771 F.3d 638, 640 (9th Cir. 201 5 ). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP , 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm. The district court properly dismissed Khorshed’s ADA and Title VII claims because these statutes do not impose liabi lity on individual defendants

. See Walsh v. Nev. Dep ’ t of Human Res ., 471 F.3d 1033, 1037

- 38 (9th Cir. 2006). Dismissal of K

horshed’s FLSA claim for failure to pay overtime wages was
proper because Khorshed failed to allege facts sufficient to stat e a plausible claim for unpaid overtime

. S

ee Landers , 771 F.3d at 64 4

- 4 6 ( setting forth requirements to state a plausible FLSA claim for overtime payments ) ; see also Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341

- 42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed, a plaintiff must still present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief). The district court properly dismissed Khorshed’s “human rights” claim because Khorshed failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim for3 15

- 55165

relief. See Hebbe , 627 F.3d at 341

- 42; Johnson , 534 F.3d at 1121

- 22 (9th Cir. 2008) (“A Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal may be based on either a lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence o f sufficient facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.” (citation and in ternal quotation marks omitted) )

. T he district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Khorshed’s motion
to alter or amend under Federal Rule of Civil Pro cedure 59(e) withou t first holding a hearing for the parties to present oral argument. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc ., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993) ( setting forth standard of review and grounds for relief ); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b) (“B y rule or order, the court may provide for submitting and determining motions on briefs, without oral hearings.”); C.D. Cal. L. R. 7

- 15 (“The Court may dispense with oral argument on any motion except where an oral hearing is required by statute. . . .”) ; Delange v. Dutra Const. Co., Inc ., 183 F.3d 916, 919 n.2 (9th Cir. 1999) ( setting forth standard of review of a district court’s interpretation and application of its local rules). Khorshed’s contentions regarding alleged bias of the district court judge a re unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.