OMRAN v. PRATOR (2018)

Mohammed Ahmed Hassan Abdallah Omran asserted claims based on the denial of his request for kosher or halal food while he was detained in the Caddo Correctional Center, and we affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of all defendants. See Omran v. Prator, 674 F. App'x 353, 354-55 (5th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 138 S.Ct. 74, 199 L.Ed.2d 50 (2017). Following that appeal, Omran filed a motion pursuant to Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for relief from the judgment in order to amend his complaint to assert an equal protection claim. Omran now appeals the denial of that motion.

Omran’s arguments regarding his entitlement to Rule 60 relief were not presented to the district court and are raised for the first time on appeal. He has therefore waived all of his arguments on appeal, and we perceive no extraordinary circumstances that might justify consideration of those arguments. See Morris v. Livingston, 739 F.3d 740, 752-53 (5th Cir. 2014); Mick Haig Prods. E.K. v. Does 1-670, 687 F.3d 649, 650, 652 (5th Cir. 2012).

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.