Home/Ninth Circuit/Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp.

Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp.

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 17, 2010
Docket09-16778
StatusUnpublished

This text of Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp. (Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp., (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 17 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ISSAM MANSOUR, No. 09-16778

Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:09-cv-00037-DGC

v. MEMORANDUM * CAL-WESTERN RECONVEYANCE CORP.; et al.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 25, 2010 **

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Issam Mansour appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his

action concerning foreclosure proceedings initiated by defendants. We have

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Mansour’s request for oral argument is denied. jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Seinfeld v. Bartz, 322 F.3d 693, 696 (9th Cir.

2003), and we review for an abuse of discretion a denial of a motion to alter or

amend a judgment, Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah County, Or. v. ACandS, Inc., 5

F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993).

We affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s orders entered on

April 21, 2009, and July 15, 2009.

AFFIRMED.

2 09-16778

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation E.J. Bartells Company, a Washington Corporation A.P. Green Refractories Company, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation, and Fibreboard Corp., a Delaware Corporation as Successor in Interest to the Paraffine Companies, Inc., Pabco Products, Inc., Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Plant Rubber & Asbestos Works and Plant Rubber & Asbestos Co., School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Keene Corporation, a New York Corporation Individually and as Successor in Interest to the Baldwin Ehret Hill Company, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Us Gypsum Company, a Delaware Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Flintkote Company, a Delaware Corporation, School District No. 1j, Multnomah County, Oregon v. Acands, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation Atlas Asbestos Company, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, and Armstrong Cork Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation
5 F.3d 1255 (Ninth Circuit, 1993)
Seinfeld v. Bartz
322 F.3d 693 (Ninth Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Issam Mansour v. Cal-western Reconveyance Corp., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/issam-mansour-v-cal-western-reconveyance-corp-ca9-2010.