Freemon

MEMORANDUM **

Elehue Kawika Freemon appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his civil rights action alleging race discrimination and state law claims in connection with an incident at Snow Summit, Inc. ski resort. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s order denying a motion to compel discovery, Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

Freemon does not challenge the district court’s summary judgment ruling. See Indep. Towers of Washington v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925 , 929 (9th Cir.2003) (explaining that issues not argued on appeal are deemed abandoned) (citation omitted); see also Pierce v. Multnomah County, 76 F.3d 1032 , 1037 n. 3 (9th Cir.1996) (applying rule to pro se litigants).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Freemon’s motion to compel additional discovery responses from Snow Summit, Inc. because Freemon’s discovery requests were ambiguous and burdensome. See Hallett, 296 F.3d at 751 (district court is vested with “broad discretion” to deny discovery).

Further, we do not consider Freemon’s contention that he had inadequate time…