Stebbins

Stebbins v. Doe

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 28, 202524-4992California573 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 28 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DAVID ANTHONY STEBBINS, No. 24-4992 D.C. No. 4:24-mc-80179-HSG Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

JOHN DOE, DBA Creetosis; YOUTUBE,

LLC,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 22, 2025**

Before: CLIFTON, CALLAHAN, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

David Anthony Stebbins appeals pro se from the district court’s order

barring the filing of his complaint pursuant to a vexatious litigant pre-filing review

order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the

* 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). district court’s determination that a complaint fails to state…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.