QIN LI v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

QIN LI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 18-15176

Decided: April 25, 2019

Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Qin Li, Pro Se Traci Rei Morita, Esquire, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Tracy Sanae Fukui, Esquire, Attorney, Corporation Counsel, City and County of Honolulu, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellee

MEMORANDUM **

Qin Li appeals pro se from the jury verdict in her employment discrimination action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

Li waived her challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict by failing to move for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial before the district court. See Nitco Holding Corp. v. Boujikian, 491 F.3d 1086, 1089 (9th Cir. 2007) (holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law