Case Name: Wilda Crow MERKOBRAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William FRIST, U.S. Senator, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-05
Citations: 52 F. App'x 250
Docket Number: No. 02-5821
Parties: Wilda Crow MERKOBRAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William FRIST, U.S. Senator, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before GUY and BOGGS, Circuit Judges; and EDMUNDS, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 52
Pages: 250–250

Head Matter:
Wilda Crow MERKOBRAD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. William FRIST, U.S. Senator, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 02-5821.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Dec. 5, 2002.
Before GUY and BOGGS, Circuit Judges; and EDMUNDS, District Judge.
The Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ORDER
Wilda Crow Merkobrad appeals a district court judgment that dismissed her civil complaint as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).
Merkobrad filed her complaint in the district court alleging only that she wrote Senator Frist approximately seven letters asking him to contact the President of the United States regarding unspecified retirement and reparation benefits. The district court dismissed the complaint sua sponte as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff filed a timely notice of appeal. Plaintiff has submitted a brief on appeal.
Upon de novo review, see McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 604 (6th Cir.1997), we will affirm the judgment for the reasons stated by the district court in its order entered May 15, 2002.
Accordingly, the district court's judgment is affirmed. See Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.