Case Name: IN RE: Robert W. HUNT, M.D., a Medical Corporation, Debtor. Peli Popovich Hunt, Appellant, v. David M. Goodrich, Chapter 7 Trustee; Peter C. Anderson, United States Trustee, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-07-05
Citations: 693 F. App'x 601
Docket Number: No. 16-55679
Parties: IN RE: Robert W. HUNT, M.D., a Medical Corporation, Debtor. Peli Popovich Hunt, Appellant, v. David M. Goodrich, Chapter 7 Trustee; Peter C. Anderson, United States Trustee, Appellees.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 693
Pages: 601–602

Head Matter:
IN RE: Robert W. HUNT, M.D., a Medical Corporation, Debtor. Peli Popovich Hunt, Appellant, v. David M. Goodrich, Chapter 7 Trustee; Peter C. Anderson, United States Trustee, Appellees.
No. 16-55679
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 26, 2017
Filed July 5, 2017
Peli Popovich Hunt, Pro Se
David Gould, Esquire, Gould & Gould LLP, Calabasas, CA, for Appellee David M. Goodrich
Hatty Yip, Dare Law, Trial Attorney, Office of the U.S. Trustee, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellee Peter C. Anderson
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, 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
Peli Popovich Hunt appeals pro se from the district court's orders denying her post-judgment motions "for rulings on leave to file as a vexatious litigant and return of bonds," to disqualify the chapter 7 trustee, and for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C, § 158(d) and 1291. We affirm.
In the opening brief, Hunt fails to address how the district court erred in denying her motion's. As a result, Hunt has waived her challenge to the district court's orders. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[0]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived."); Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) ("We review only issues which are argued' specifically and distinctly in a party's opening brief.").
All pending motions are denied.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,