*1 Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Richard Stanley appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

*2 In his opening brief, Stanley fails to address how the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his action for failure to comply with the local rules. As a result, Stanley has waived his challenge to the dismissal order. See Smith v. Marsh , 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“On appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”); Greenwood v. FAA , 28 F.3d 971, 977 (9th Cir. 1994) (“We will not manufacture arguments for an appellant . . . .”).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-55633

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

[**] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Stanley’s request for oral argument, set forth in his opening brief, is denied.