Summary
affirming summary judgment where plaintiffs failed to timely respond to defendants' request for admission that defendants had not violated plaintiffs' rights during search of premises
Summary of this case from Lee v. City of San LeandroOpinion
No. 08-17226.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed January 5, 2010.
Zakiya Vaughn, as an Individual and Guardian ad Litem for Minors, Jamonte Vaughn, Jamarco Vaughn, Jalen Vaughn, Elk Grove, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Marcos Kropf, Esquire, Office of Sacramento City Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Lawrence K. Karlton, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01119-LKKKJM.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Zakiya Vaughn and her children appeal pro se from the district court's summary judgment in their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging Fourteenth Amendment violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Conlon v. United States, 474 F.3d 616, 621 (9th Cir. 2007), and we affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment because plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of material fact as to whether the Sacramento City Police had a custom or practice of ignoring the safety of African-American individuals when searching premises for criminal suspects. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 36(a)(3) (deeming admitted matters set forth in a request for admission unless the party to whom the request is directed responds within 30 days); Conlon, 474 F.3d at 621 ("Unanswered requests for admissions may be relied on as the basis for granting summary judgment.").