Wayne Perryman v. City of Seattle Police Dep't.

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 18 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WAYNE PERRYMAN; SEAN No. 19-35129 PERRYMAN, D.C. No. 2:17-cv-00274-RSL Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. MEMORANDUM*

CITY OF SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 11, 2019**

Before: WALLACE, CANBY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.

Wayne Perryman and Sean Perryman appeal pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law

claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a

* 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). dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Cervantes v.

Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ action because plaintiffs

failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627

F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are liberally construed,

a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim); Beck v. Upland,

527 F.3d 853, 864 (9th Cir. 2008) (a false arrest claim requires the absence of

probable cause); Monteiro v. Tempe Union High Sch. Dist., 158 F.3d 1022, 1026

(9th Cir. 1998) (§ 1983 equal protection claim must allege facts that are at least

susceptible to an inference of intentional discrimination).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Plaintiffs’ motions to supplement the record are denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 19-35129