CARTER v. OATH HOLDINGS INC (2019)

MEMORANDUM ***

Brian K. Carter appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his action alleging trademark infringement claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by striking Carter's filing challenging defendant's correction in its notice of removal of the proper named defendant, or by denying Carter's motions for “award of compensation.” See Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR Mfg., Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 404 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth standard of review and explaining that a district court has inherent power to control its docket, including power to strike items from the docket).

In his opening brief, Carter fails to raise, and therefore has waived, any challenge to the district court's dismissal of his action. See Indep. Towers of Wash. v. Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[W]e will not consider any claims that were not actually argued in appellant's opening brief.”); Acosta-Huerta v. Estelle, 7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1993) (issues not supported by argument in pro se appellant's opening brief are waived).

AFFIRMED.