Narrative Opinion Summary
A review of the record and responses to the court's May 11, 2007 order reveals that the issues in this appeal lack sufficient substance to warrant further argument. The district court acted within its discretion by granting the appellees' application for renewal of judgment and denying the appellant's motions to vacate both the original and renewed judgment. The relevant legal standards affirm that such orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Consequently, the court summarily affirms the district court’s judgment, denies all pending motions as moot, and states that this disposition is not suitable for publication and does not serve as precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Non-Publication of Dispositionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision is not designated for publication and is not precedential, limiting its applicability in future cases.
Reasoning: This disposition is not suitable for publication and does not serve as precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Review for Abuse of Discretionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The district court's decision to grant the appellees' application for renewal of judgment and deny the appellant's motions to vacate was reviewed under the standard of abuse of discretion.
Reasoning: The relevant legal standards affirm that such orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Summary Affirmance of Judgmentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court summarily affirmed the district court's judgment, indicating that the appeal did not present substantial issues requiring further argument.
Reasoning: Consequently, the court summarily affirms the district court’s judgment, denies all pending motions as moot, and states that this disposition is not suitable for publication and does not serve as precedent except as specified by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.