Qin Li v. City and County of Honolulu

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: April 25, 2019
• Docket: 18-15176
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 25 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

QIN LI, No. 18-15176

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:14-cv-00573-LEK-RLP

v. MEMORANDUM* CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii Leslie E. Kobayashi, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 17, 2019**

Before: McKEOWN, BYBEE, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

Qin Li appeals pro se from the jury verdict in her employment

discrimination action. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

Li waived her challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the

jury’s verdict by failing to move for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial

* 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). before the district court. See Nitco Holding Corp. v. Boujikian, 491 F.3d 1086,

1089 (9th Cir. 2007) (holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence

challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new

trial under Rule 50(b)).

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).

AFFIRMED.

2 18-15176