Ramona Lopez v. John Potter

Good Law
370 F. App'x 840
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 11, 201008-16465California652 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

It was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to strike Lopez’s non-compliant summary judgment filings. See Leong v. Potter, 347 F.3d 1117, 1125 (9th Cir. 2003). The district court repeatedly notified Lopez that her filings were procedurally deficient, and Lopez failed to take advantage of opportunities to file properly. The some fifteen-hundred pages of documentary evidence submitted by Lopez and stricken by the district court consisted of a loose collection of papers that were neither numbered nor arranged to correlate to documents identified in Lopez’s moving papers. Under these circumstances, the district court was under no obligation to “search the entire record” for disputed facts. See Carmen v. S.F. Unified, Sch. Dist, 237 F.3d 1026 , 1030-31 (9th Cir. 2001). “Pro se litigants must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants.” King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir.1987).

Under the record properly before the district court, we find no error in the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the United States Postmaster General (USPS). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Lopez, the record shows that…

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.