Porter

MEMORANDUM *

Dorothy Porter appeals the district court’s orders denying her motion to compel discovery, granting summary judgment in favor of defendants on several claims, *606 and denying her motion in limine to exclude expert opinion testimony during the trial of the remaining claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm in all respects. Because of our disposition of this case, all cross-appeals are dismissed as moot.

“Discovery requests ... are ... committed to the sound discretion of the trial court ... and [a] decision to deny discovery will not be disturbed except upon the clearest showing that [it] resulted] in actual and substantial prejudice to the complaining litigant.” Sablan v. Dep’t of Fin. of N. Mariana Islands, 856 F.2d 1317 , 1321 (9th Cir.1988) (internal citations, quotations omitted). Concerned that “the parties were using discovery inappropriately and were seeking depositions or documents that did not appear relevant to the case,” the district court denied several pending discovery motions, including the motion at issue here. Porter’s arguments concerning the attorney-client privilege miss the mark because the court below closed…