Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit err in granting Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Appeal by failing to consider Petitioner's arguments that the district court erred by applying federal statute instead of State of California substantive law for vacating a renewal of judgment?

QUESTION PRESENTED The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed Petitioner’s appeal holding that the questions raised in the appeal were so insubstantial as not to require further argument. The district court denied Petitioner’s motion to vacate a renewal of judgment applying the federal rules of civil procedure. The question presented, on which there appears to be no federal case on point, and the matter is one of first impression, is: Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit err in granting Respondent’s Motion to ; Dismiss Appeal by failing to consider Petitioner’s arguments that the district court erred by applying federal statute instead of State of California substantive law for vacating a renewal of judgment? i