Case ID: f-appx_384/html/0647-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Glen BROEMER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-56265.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted May 25, 2010.
    
    Filed June 18, 2010.
    Glen Broemer, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
    Robert I. Lester, United States Attorneys Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    
      Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Glen Broemer appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his action alleging that employees of the Central Intelligence Agency have been following him, threatening him, and physically injuring him for many years. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. McDonald v. Sun Oil Co., 548 F.3d 774, 778 (9th Cir.2008), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 129 S.Ct. 2825, 174 L.Ed.2d 552 (2009). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on the claims in Broemer’s fourth amended complaint because Broemer did not raise a triable issue as to whether he had been harmed by the defendants. See Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 952 n. 2 (9th Cir.2007) (explaining that a “conclusory, self-serving affidavit, lacking detailed facts and any supporting evidence, is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Broemer’s remaining contentions, including his challenges to dismissals of claims and defendants from his previous complaints, are unpersuasive.

All pending motions are denied.

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