Duane Jensen v. Lvmpd

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: April 16, 2020
• Docket: 18-15590
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 16 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DUANE JENSEN, No. 18-15590

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:14-cv-00029-RFB-VCF

v. MEMORANDUM* LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT; et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Richard F. Boulware II, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 7, 2020**

Before: TASHIMA, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Duane Jensen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment following a

jury verdict in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his First

Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

Jensen waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 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,

1089-90 (9th Cir. 2007) (to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a

party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a) and a post-

verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)).

AFFIRMED.

2 18-15590