Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 9435944
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Raul Arellano v. Michael Santos
No. 9435944 · Decided October 30, 2023
No. 9435944·Ninth Circuit · 2023·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 30, 2023
Citation
No. 9435944
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RAUL ARELLANO, No. 21-56348
Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No.
3:18-cv-02391-BTM-WVG
v.
MICHAEL BALBIN SANTOS, Primary MEMORANDUM*
Care Provider; CALIFORNIA
CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE
SERVICES; DANIEL PARAMO, Warden;
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Barry Ted Moskowitz, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 30, 2023**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
Raul Arellano appeals pro se from the district court’s grant of summary
*
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).
judgment in favor of the defendants and the court’s denial of his motion for
reconsideration. Because the facts are known to the parties, we repeat them only
as necessary to explain our decision.
A party’s opening brief must include its arguments, including contentions
and reasoning. Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A). This court does not consider matters
that are not “specifically and distinctly argued” in an appellant’s opening brief.
Christian Legal Soc’y Chapter of Univ. of Cal. v. Wu, 626 F.3d 483, 487 (9th Cir.
2010) (quoting Miller v. Fairchild Indus., Inc., 797 F.2d 727, 738 (9th Cir. 1986)).
We cannot identify a specific and distinct argument against the district court’s
judgment in Arellano’s opening brief, and we are compelled to strike it and dismiss
the appeal. See Ninth Circuit Rule 28-1(a); Cf. Sekiya v. Gates, 508 F.3d 1198,
1200 (9th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). Mindful of the harshness of this rule, we have
reviewed the district court record, and we are satisfied that the district court did not
err. Cf. Sekiya, 508 F.3d at 1200.
DISMISSED.
2
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2023 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2023 MOLLY C.
02MICHAEL BALBIN SANTOS, Primary MEMORANDUM* Care Provider; CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES; DANIEL PARAMO, Warden; CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, Defendants-Appellees.
03Raul Arellano appeals pro se from the district court’s grant of summary * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
04** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2023 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Raul Arellano v. Michael Santos in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 30, 2023.
Use the citation No. 9435944 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.