NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 24 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LOWELL ROBINSON, Jr., Master Sergeant No. 23-16071 USMC, Retired, D.C. No. 2:22-cv-00687-SMB Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.;

LEANDRO GUILLEN, Loan Advisor; JOYA LEWIS, Loan Associate; STACY MARTIN, Capital Title; MANDY BENNETT, Capital Title/Supervisor; RANDY MOULTRY, Mueller Services Inc's Appraiser; ALONZO GONZALEZ, JP Morgan Chase/Supervisor,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Susan M. Brnovich, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 17, 2025**

Before: CANBY, R. NELSON, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

* 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). Lowell Robinson, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his action alleging discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity

Act (“ECOA”) arising from a loan application process. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Puri v. Khalsa, 844 F.3d 1152, 1157

(9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Robinson’s action because Robinson

failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants discriminated against him

under the ECOA. See 15 U.S.C. § 1691(a) (prohibiting discrimination by creditors

with respect to credit transactions on the basis of certain protected grounds);

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (explaining that, 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 arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

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

AFFIRMED.

2 23-16071