Case Name: Travon THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ron HOOPS, Sheriff official and individual capacity; et al., Defendants, and D. M. Bolot, Facility Administrator official and individual capacity; James Henning, Facility Chaplain official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-04
Citations: 698 F. App'x 451
Docket Number: No. 15-55594
Parties: Travon THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ron HOOPS, Sheriff official and individual capacity; et al., Defendants, and D. M. Bolot, Facility Administrator official and individual capacity; James Henning, Facility Chaplain official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: .SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 698
Pages: 451–452

Head Matter:
Travon THOMPSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ron HOOPS, Sheriff official and individual capacity; et al., Defendants, and D. M. Bolot, Facility Administrator official and individual capacity; James Henning, Facility Chaplain official and individual capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-55594
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted September 26, 2017
October 4, 2017
Travon Thompson, Apple Valley, CA, pro se.
James H. Thebeau, Esquire, Deputy County Counsel, San Bernardino, CA, Defendant-Appellee.
Before: .SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Travon Thompson appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his right to free exercise of religion during his pretrial detention. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.
In his opening brief, Thompson failed to challenge the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendants, or any other district court order, and therefore Thompson waived any such challenge. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[Ajrguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.").
We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.