Berry

MEMORANDUM **

Richard S. Berry, Jean D. Berry, and Rose Quintero appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of all defendants and its denial of Richard Berry’s motion for partial summary judgment. 1 We have jurisdiction to consider the issues raised on appeal, see 28 U.S.C. § 1291 ; Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 286 , 125 S.Ct. 1517 , 161 L.Ed.2d 454 (2005), and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

First, we affirm the district court’s conclusion that the definition of practice of law in Arizona Supreme Court Rule 31 is not unconstitutionally vague or overbroad. Rule 31 provides “people of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to understand what conduct it prohibits” and does not authorize or encourage “arbitrary [or] discriminatory enforcement.” See Gospel Missions of Am. v. City of Los Angeles, 419 F.3d 1042 , 1047 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Cal. *434 Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Randolph, 507 F.3d 1172, 1189 (9th Cir.2007); Cal. Teachers Ass’n v. State Bd. of Educ., 271 F.3d 1141 , 1151 (9th Cir.2001).

Second, we affirm the district court’s conclusion that Section…