Betty Shanklin v. City of Pasadena Philip Hawkey June Callahan Dorothy Kirkland

979 F.2d 855 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Betty SHANKLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PASADENA; Philip Hawkey; June Callahan; Dorothy Kirkland, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-55310. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 4, 1992. * Decided Nov. 12, 1992. Before SCHROEDER, FLETCHER and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Betty Shanklin appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The district court determined that Shanklin's action was barred by the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo the district court's dismissal of a section 1983 claim on statute of limitations grounds. Donoghue v. Orange County, 848 F.2d 926, 929 (9th Cir.1987). 4 Barring exceptional circumstances, we will not consider arguments not raised before the district court. In Re Professional Inv. Properties of Am., 955 F.2d 623 , 625 (9th…