FOURSTAR v. BULLOCK (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

Victor Charles Fourstar, Jr., a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), for failure to state a claim and imposing a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

In his opening brief, Fourstar fails to address the grounds for dismissal and has therefore waived his challenge to the district court’s judgment. 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. 1992) (issues not supported by argument in pro se appellant’s opening brief are waived); see also Greenwood v. FAA, 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant, and a bare assertion does not preserve a claim[.]”).

To the extent Fourstar contends he was not a prisoner and not subject to the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, we reject this contention as unsupported by the record.

AFFIRMED.