NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 27 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PATRINA HALL, AKA Patrina Harrison, No. 22-16233

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:21-cv-10079-PJH

v.

MEMORANDUM*

IFIT HEALTH & FITNESS; ICON

HEALTH & FITNESS / NORDICTRACK;

UTS,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 21, 2024**

Before: FERNANDEZ, NGUYEN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Patrina Harrison appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

her state law action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). In her opening brief, Harrison failed to address the grounds for dismissal and

has therefore waived her challenge to the district court’s order. See Indep. Towers

of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (explaining that “we

cannot manufacture arguments for an appellant and therefore we will not consider

any claims that were not actually argued in appellant’s opening brief” (citation and

internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

2 22-16233