MEMORANDUM **
Cheryl Kelmar appeals pro se from the district courts order rejecting her proposed complaint under a pre-filing vexatious litigant order. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion. Moy v. United States, 906 F.2d 467, 469 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by rejecting Kelmars proposed complaint because the complaint was within the scope of the district courts pre-filing vexatious litigant order. See Weissman v. Quail Lodge, Inc., 179 F.3d 1194, 1197 (9th Cir. 1999) (“District courts have the inherent power to file restrictive pre-filing orders against vexatious litigants with abusive and lengthy histories of litigation. Such pre-filing orders may enjoin the litigant from filing further actions or papers unless he or she first meets certain requirements, such as obtaining leave of the court․” (internal citation omitted)).
We reject as without merit Kelmars contention that the district judge should have recused himself from this action.
We do not consider Kelmars contentions regarding the underlying merits of her proposed complaint or the vexatious litigant orders against her in the Central District of California and Santa Barbara County Superior Court because those issues are outside the scope of this appeal.