Case ID: f-appx_402/html/0301-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Hana HILSENRATH and Oliver Hilsenrath, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CREDIT SUISSE (CS) and United Bank of Switzerland (UBS), Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-15230.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Oct. 19, 2010.
    
    Filed Nov. 2, 2010.
    Hana Hilsenrath, Washington, DC, pro se.
    Oliver Hilsenrath, Washington, DC, pro se.
    Yohance Claude Edwards, Esquire, Trial, Munger Tolies & Olson, LLP, San Francisco, CA, George Michael Garvey, Esquire, Munger, Tolies & Olson, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appel-lees.
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Hana Hilsenrath and Oliver Hilsenrath appeal pro se the district court’s dismissal of their action against Credit Suisse and the United Bank of Switzerland alleging that the banks failed to warn them through a product-warning label that the banks would not comply with the United States Constitution and its provisions to protect the constitutional right to property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Our review is de novo, Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s Order filed on January 10, 2008.

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