
    William LANDRUM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Laura SCHWEITZER; State of Arizona Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 08-17771.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.
    
    Filed Oct. 4, 2010.
    William Landrum, Buckeye, AZ, pro se.
    Robert Anthony Walsh, Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix, AZ, for Respondents-Appellees.
    Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Arizona state prisoner William Landrum appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition for untimeliness. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Landrum contends that several extraordinary circumstances prevented the timely filing of his federal habeas petition and that equitable tolling was warranted. This argument is waived because it was not properly raised before the district court. See United States v. Carlson, 900 F.2d 1346, 1349 (9th Cir.1990). Furthermore, Landrum was not entitled to equitable tolling. See Rasberry v. Garcia, 448 F.3d 1150, 1154 (9th Cir.2006) (“[A] pro se petitioner’s lack of legal sophistication is not, by itself, an extraordinary circumstance warranting equitable tolling.”).

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