Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Anthony CHRISANTHIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brian CASON; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

MEMORANDUM

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

Anthony Chrisanthis appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his action alleging that defendants retaliated against him for reporting unsafe workplace conditions in violation of the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA") and other laws. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Mangano v. United States, 529 F.3d 1243, 1245 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Chrisanthis's FTCA claims because defendants' alleged retaliatory conduct fell within the scope of the Civil Service Reform Act's prohibited personnel practices, and thus his claims were preempted. See id. at 1246.

We do not consider issues that were not raised in Chrisanthis's opening brief. See Friends of Yosemite Valley v. Kempthorne, 520 F.3d 1024, 1033 (9th Cir. 2008) (arguments not raised by a party in the opening brief are deemed abandoned).

Chrisanthis's contention regarding the U.S. Attorney's Office's representation of defendants Cason and Spivey is unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CHRISANTHIS v. CASON
(Jun 7, 2010)