Case Name: George E. MIXON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cheryl PLILER; et al., Defendants-Appellees, and California Department of Corrections; et al., Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-12-21
Citations: 214 F. App'x 662
Docket Number: No. 06-15890
Parties: George E. MIXON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cheryl PLILER; et al., Defendants-Appellees, and California Department of Corrections; et al., Defendants.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, McKEOWN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 214
Pages: 662–662

Head Matter:
George E. MIXON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cheryl PLILER; et al., Defendants-Appellees, and California Department of Corrections; et al., Defendants.
No. 06-15890.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 18, 2006.
Filed Dec. 21, 2006.
George E. Mixon, Lancaster, CA, pro se.
Brahim George Seikaly, AGCA—Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: GOODWIN, McKEOWN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
A review of the record and the response to the court's September 21, 2006 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.
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.