Ovitsky v. California Department of Fair Employment & Housing

594 F. App'x 424
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 27, 2015
Docket13-55221
StatusUnpublished

This text of 594 F. App'x 424 (Ovitsky v. California Department of Fair Employment & Housing) 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
Ovitsky v. California Department of Fair Employment & Housing, 594 F. App'x 424 (9th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Abby Jo Ovitsky appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and various state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of standing, Canatella v. California, 304 F.3d 843, 852 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Ovitsky’s claim for injunctive relief under the ADA because Ovitsky failed to allege a “real and immediate threat of repeated injury in the future.” Chapman v. Pier 1 Imps. (U.S.) Inc., 631 F.3d 939, 946, 949 (9th Cir.2011) (en banc) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

We do not consider, matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n. 2 (9th Cir.2009) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

**

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

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

Related

Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports (U.S.) Inc.
631 F.3d 939 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
Padgett v. Wright
587 F.3d 983 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
Canatella v. California
304 F.3d 843 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
594 F. App'x 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ovitsky-v-california-department-of-fair-employment-housing-ca9-2015.