
    Patsy N. SAKUMA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF THE TROPICS AT WAIKELE, an incorporated association, by its board of directors; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 16-16791
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted December 18, 2017 
    
    Filed December 21, 2017
    Patsy N. Sakuma, Pro Se
    Matt Tsukazaki, Esquire, Trial Attorney, Li & Tsukazaki, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellee Association of Apartment Owners of the Tropics at Waikele
    Janelle Mae Fong Lau, Esquire, Attorney, Motooka & Rosenberg, LLLC, Honolulu, HI, for Defendants-Appellees Milton M. Motooka, Motooka Yamamoto & Revere, LLP
    
      Christopher Tanega Goodin, Esquire, Attorney, Peter William Olson, Attorney, Cades Schutte LLP, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellee Porter McGuire Kiakona & Chow, LLP
    Robyn B. Chun, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, AGHI — -Office of the Hawaii Attorney General, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellee James S. Ko-metani
    Jonathan W. Y. Lai, Esquire, Attorney, Watanabe Ing LLP, Honolulu, HI, for Defendants-Appellees First Hawaiian Bank, Watanabe Ing, LLP
    Leta Huang Price, Legal Counsel, Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc., Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellee Title Guaranty Escrow Services, Inc.
    Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App, P, 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Patsy N. Sakuma appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

Dismissal of Sakuma’s action was proper because Sakuma failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible RICO claim. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, a plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief); Living Designs, Inc. v. E.I. Dupont de Nemours & Co., 431 F.3d 353, 361 (9th Cir. 2005) (elements of a civil RICO claim).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

Sakuma’s motion to file supplemental excerpts of record (Docket Entry No. 40) is granted and the docket reflects that the supplemental excerpts of record have been filed. All other pending requests and motions are denied.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
     