Case ID: f-appx_183/html/0693-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James CONNELLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF RENO, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 05-15326.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 5, 2006.
    
    Filed June 9, 2006.
    James Connelly, San Diego, CA, pro se.
    Allen D. Gibson, Esq., Reno City Attorney, Reno, NV, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before: CANBY, T.G. NELSON and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

We have received notice of appellant’s payment of the docketing and filing fees for this appeal.

A review of the record and appellant’s response to the court’s order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court’s judgment.

All pending motions are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.