DISCUSSION

By failing to raise the only appealable issue in the opening brief, we deem the

claim abandoned.

2 “‘An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. [Citation.] Hence,

the appellant must make a challenge. In so doing, he must raise claims of reversible error

or other defect [citation], and “present argument and authority on each point made.”’”

(Conservatorship of Ben C. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 529, 544, fn. 8.)

This case is similar to Berger v. Godden (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 1113. In that

case, the appellant filed a first opening brief that was not in compliance with the

California Rules of Court and appellant was given 30 days within which to file a

conforming brief. (Id. at p. 1116.) Further, the order directed appellant to address two

specific issues in the new opening brief. (Id. at pp. 1116-1117.) The appellant filed a

second brief raising no discernible legal issues and failed to cite to any authority.

Moreover, the appellant did not address the two issues as ordered by the Court of Appeal.

(Id. at p. 1117.) The Berger court dismissed the appellant’s appeal for failing “to address

in his second brief the two issues specified by [the] court” and for failing to advance any

pertinent or intelligible argument. (Id. at pp. 1117, 1119-1120.)

Here, Castle Eurasia was advised by this court that it could file an opening brief

addressing the award of costs. Despite this order, Castle has filed its opening brief

raising claims that only address the wrongful dismissal of its complaint; issues that were

foreclosed by our granting of FHLC’s motion to dismiss. As such, we deem any claim as

to the costs awarded to respondent as abandoned and dismiss the appeal.

3

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed. Respondent is awarded its costs on appeal.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

MILLER

J.

We concur:

RAMIREZ

P. J.

HOLLENHORST

J.

4