Case Name: IN RE Jerry A. BRENDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-03-20
Citations: 683 F. App'x 640
Docket Number: No. 16-35436
Parties: IN RE Jerry A. BRENDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 683
Pages: 640–640

Head Matter:
IN RE Jerry A. BRENDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant.
No. 16-35436
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 8, 2017
Filed March 20, 2017
Jerry A. Brenden, Pro Se
Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, 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
Jerry A. Brenden appeals pro se from the district court's order denying him leave to file a complaint under a vexatious litigant order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the application of a vexatious litigant order. Moy v. United States, 906 F.2d 467, 469 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to treat Brenden's proposed complaint as commencing a civil action because Brenden failed to comply with the requirements set forth in the vexatious litigant ordered entered against him. See West v. Procunier, 452 F.2d 645, 646 (9th Cir. 1971) (concluding that an order refusing to authorize filing of complaint was a "proper exercise of the district court's authority to effectuate compliance with its earlier order").
To the extent that Brenden seeks to challenge the underlying vexatious litigant order, we do not consider his contentions because such a challenge is outside the scope of this appeal.
We do not consider any motions and requests relating to other district court cases and appeals.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.