Case Name: Richard Roy SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark SELING; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-05
Citations: 314 F. App'x 8
Docket Number: No. 05-35036
Parties: Richard Roy SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark SELING; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 314
Pages: 8–9

Head Matter:
Richard Roy SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mark SELING; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-35036.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 22, 2008.
Filed Aug. 5, 2008.
Richard Roy Scott, Steilacoom, WA, pro se.
Timothy Norman Lang, Esq., Donna J. Hamilton, Esq., Gordon & Rees, LLP, Phoenix, AZ, Jeffrey R. Erwin, Esq., Office of the Washington Attorney General, Social & Health Services, Olympia, WA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Richard Roy Scott appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his civil rights in connection with his detainment in the Washington State Special Commitment Center. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Navarro v. Block, 72 F.3d 712, 714 (9th Cir.1995). We affirm.
Scott advances no argument challenging the district court's dismissal of the action. We therefore deem any challenge to the judgment abandoned. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir.2003) (explaining that issues not argued on appeal are deemed abandoned).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R, 36-3.