NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 23 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM J. WHITSITT, No. 21-16636

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:21-cv-00016-TLN-CKD

v.

MEMORANDUM*

MEEKS, CLC Administrator; CITY OF

STOCKTON; CITY OF MANTECA; SAN

JOAQUIN COUNTY COURTS;

PLUMMER, Stockton Police Officer; SARA LIZERO, SJC Probation Control Unit; SAN

JOAQUIN COUNTY PROBATION

DEPARTMENT; CHRISTIAN LIFE

CHURCH; KINNEY, Security for CLC; NATHANIEL HANEY, Pastor CLC;

CHRISTIAN LIFE COLLEGE; LONG, SJC

Sheriff Deputy,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 16, 2024**

* 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). Before: SCHROEDER, VANDYKE, and KOH, Circuit Judges.

The motion to recall the mandate (Docket Entry No. 21) is granted. The

February 2, 2023 order of dismissal for failure to prosecute is vacated and the

appeal is reinstated.

William J. Whitsitt appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his action alleging various federal claims. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s dismissal for failure to

state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108,

1112 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Whitsitt’s action because Whitsitt

failed to allege facts sufficient to state any plausible claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient

factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its

face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

We do not consider matters raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett

v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

The motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 18) is treated as a motion

to file a supplemental opening brief and is granted. The Clerk will file Docket

Entry No. 19 as a supplemental opening brief.

AFFIRMED.

2 21-16636