Morilha v. United States

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 26 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANIEL VITOR MORILHA, No. 24-949 D.C. No. 4:23-cv-05008-JST Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. MEMORANDUM*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, People of the United States of America,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Jon S. Tigar, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 17, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, OWENS, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Daniel Vitor Morilha appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27(a) petition to perpetuate the testimony of witnesses. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse

*

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).

of discretion. Campbell v. Blodgett, 982 F.2d 1356, 1358 (9th Cir. 1993). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Morilha’s petition to perpetuate testimony because Morilha failed to satisfy the requirements of Rule 27(a). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 27(a)(1) (listing requirements for petition to perpetuate testimony, including “that the petitioner expects to be a party to an action cognizable in a United States court but cannot presently bring it or cause it to be brought”).

The motion (Docket Entry No. 9) to expedite is denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.

2 24-949