Paap
Paap v. Salt River Project
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Larry Scott Paap appeals pro se from the district court’s orders granting summary judgment in favor of defendant and denying his motion to reconsider in his action alleging federal claims of discrimination and various state law claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s summary judgment de novo, RK Ventures, Inc. v. City of Seattle, 307 F.3d 1045 , 1062 n. 14 (9th Cir.2002), and its denial of a motion to reconsider for abuse of discretion, School Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir.1993). We affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Paap’s defamation claims based on various statements made by defendant’s employees, because some of the claims were barred by the statute of limitations, RK Ventures, Inc., 307 F.3d at 1058 , and the others were supported by insufficient evidence, Keyser v. Sacramento City Unified Sch. Dist., 265 F.3d 741, 754-55 (9th Cir.2001).
To the extent Paap contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to reconsider, we reject this assertion because the motion was based on an unsworn letter that Paap did not argue was…