Mike Yellen v. Boyd Gaming Corporation

MEMORANDUM

Mike Yellen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his civil rights action alleging First and Fourteenth Amendment claims related to the denial of entry into a private bowling tournament. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a determination that a complaint fails to state a claim, Trerice v. Pedersen, 769 F.2d 1398, 1400 (9th Cir.1985), and for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to effect timely service, Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 273 (9th Cir.1990). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Yellen’s action for failure to effect timely service because Yel-len did not seek an extension to serve defendants and failed to provide the district court with a reason for his delay. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m); Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983 , 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009) (per cu-riam) (arguments raised for the first time on appeal are deemed waived).

Moreover, the district court properly determined that Yellen failed to state a viable § 1983 claim because…