Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 10815 Su m m ar y Cal endar
RO BER T A BELL Pl ai nt i f f

- Appe l l ant
v. T OMM YNOR W OOD ; LAWTON F RE DE RI CKTY S O N ; C HR I S T I NA M EL T ON CRAI N; BEC KY P RI CE; W a r d e n BRUCE Z EL LE R D efen da n t s- A pp el l ees
A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e N ort h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 7: 08- C V

- 69
B ef ore W IE N E R , ST E W A R T , an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * R obe r tA
. B el l , Texas pr i so ner# 75 5528, f i l ed t he i nst ant42 U
. S. C
. § 1983 sui tt o seek redress f or vari ou s w rongs. B el lcontended t h at hi s r i gh t s w ere vi ol ated bec ause he r ec eived no m ai lon Sat urdays and bec ause he w as t ran sport ed i n veh i cl es t h at l acked seatbel t s. H e al so al l eged t h at another i nm a t e v i o l a t e dh i s r i g h t s . T h e d i s t r i c tc o u r td i s m i s s e dh i s s u i ta s f r iv o l o us United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April13, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 10815

2 u n d e r2 8 U. S
. C
. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B ) (i) a n dd e n i e dh i s r e q u e s tt o p r o c e e di n f o r ma p a u p e r is (IF P ) o n a p p e a l. B e ll a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a b u s e dit s d is c r e tio n b yd is m is s in gh is c l ai m c o nc e r ni ng uns af e t r ans po r t at i on . B el ldo e s no tpr e s e nta r gum e nt concerni n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s det erm i n ati on s t h at hi s r em ai n i n g cl ai m s w ere al so m eri t l ess. B el l ’ s fai l u re t o bri ef t h ese i ssues resul t s i n an aba n don m en tof th e s e is s u e s . Se eYoh ey v . Col l i ns , 9 8 5 F .2d 2 2 2 , 2 2 4 -2 5 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 3 ). B el l ’ s “ ap pea li n volves l egal poi n t s argua bl e on thei r m eri t s ( an d theref ore not f r ivol ous )
. ” How ardv. Ki ng , 707 F. 2d 215, 220 ( 5t h C i r . 1983) (i nt er nal q u o ta tio n m a r k s a n dcit a tio n o m itt e d ). B e ll’ s m o tio n fo r le a v e to p r o c e e dIF P is th e r e fo r e G R A N T E D
. S ee B augh v. T aylor , 1 1 7 F .3d 1 9 7 , 2 0 2 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 7 ). W e di s pe ns e , ho w e ve r , w i t h f ur t he rb r i e f

i ng i n t hi s a ppe al , a nd, f o rt he r e as o ns give n be l ow , aff

i rm the distri ct cou rt’ s j u d gm en t. Bel lr e l i e s o n Hel l i ng v. McKi n n ey , 5 0 9 U .S . 2 5 , 2 8 ( 1 9 9 3 ), in s u p p o r t o f h is ar gume n tth a tth ed e f e n da nt s b r e ac he d hi s c o ns t i t ut i o nalr i ght s b y t r ans po r t i ng h i m i n a veh i cl e t h at l acked seatbel t s. B el la l so con t en ds t h at of f i ci al s i n f

ri n ged h i s ri gh ts b y fail i n g to co m p l y w i th T EX . G OV’ T C ODE § 500
. 006 ( a)
. B el lha s not s ho w n t hatt he de fe nda nt s i nf r i nge d hi s c o ns t i t ut i o nalr i ght s b y t ran spo r t i ng h i m in v eh i cl es that w ere n oteq u i pp ed w i t h seatbel t s. C on sequ en t l y, he h as not s h o w n th a t t h e d is tr ic t c o u r t a b u s e dits d is c r e t i o n b yd is m is s in gh is s u it. S ee S iglar v. High t ow er , 1 1 2 F .3 d1 9 1 , 1 9 3 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 7 ); se e a lso R es id en t Co u n cil v. Un it edS t at e s D e

p’ tof Hous . and Ur ban D e v. , 9 80 F. 2d1 04 3, 1 05 0 ( 5t h Ci r. 1 9 9 3 )
. T h e j u d g me n to f t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r ti s A F F I RMED.