Sharp

MEMORANDUM ***

David Sharp appeals the district court’s summary judgment for the defendants on his conversion, invasion of privacy and RICO claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, see Botosan v. Paul McNally Realty, 216 F.3d 827, 830 (9th Cir.2000), the district court’s exclusion of evidence, in the context of summary judgment, for an abuse of discretion, see Kennedy v. Collagen Corp., 161 F.3d 1226, 1227 (9th Cir.1998), and the district court’s discovery rulings for an abuse of discretion, see Simula, Inc. v. Autoliv, Inc., 175 F.3d 716, 726 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

Sharp primarily argues that the district court abused its discretion in not considering portions of the evidence he submitted in opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment because if found the evidence inadmissible. The district court did not abuse its discretion in applying the Federal Rules of Evidence to the proffered evidence and concluding that portions of it were inadmissible. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e); Beyene v. Coleman Sec. Services, Inc., 854 F.2d 1179 , 1181-82 (9th Cir.1988). Viewed in the light most…