Arabella Lemus v. H&R Block Enterprises, Inc.

594 F. App'x 419

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: February 27, 2015
• Docket: 13-16628
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Paul Singh Madar appeals pro se from the district court’s order disallowing his claim against a class action settlement fund. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. In re Gypsum Antitrust Cases, 565 F.2d 1123, 1128 (9th Cir.1977). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by disallowing Madar’s claim to a portion of the settlement where Madar’s claim was not timely received, and Madar “made no showing that [his] claim was treated in a fashion inconsistent with those of other claimants similarly situated.” Id. (“In reviewing the court’s exercise of its discretion, we are not to substitute our ideas of fairness for those of the district judge in the absence of evidence that [she] acted arbitrarily[.]” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.