June 26, 2026·1:24-cv-01873-MC·Unpublished·By Aisha Johnson
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se plaintiff's claims arising from a traffic stop. The court held that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to state a plausible claim for relief under federal law.
Gavriel Green, proceeding pro se, appealed a district court judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from a traffic stop. The district court had also denied Green’s motion for reconsideration.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the dismissal de novo and concluded that the complaint lacked sufficient factual matter to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. The court cited the standard for consent to search and the justification for vehicle impoundment but found the plaintiff’s allegations insufficient. The court also rejected the contention of judicial bias as unsupported by the record and declined to consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal.
What it means going forward
The dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims stands, and the lower court’s denial of reconsideration is upheld.
