Case ID: f-appx_35/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

Richard M. WARR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 01-35763.
    D.C. No. CV-00-03027-FVS.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 13, 2002 .
    Decided May 29, 2002.
    Before FERNANDEZ, WARDLAW, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant's request for oral argument is denied.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Richard Warr appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his action, which alleged damages as a result of the lack of irrigation water. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the summary judgment, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Warr contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction over his action. We disagree.

The district court properly exercised jurisdiction over this action after it was transferred from the Court of Federal Claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631; Miller v. Hambrick, 905 F.2d 259, 262 (9th Cir. 1990).

Warr’s remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.