Case Name: Bruce Ameil WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warner Chappell MUSIC, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-04-22
Citations: 274 F. App'x 601
Docket Number: No. 07-56567
Parties: Bruce Ameil WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Warner Chappell MUSIC, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 274
Pages: 601–602

Head Matter:
Bruce Ameil WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Warner Chappell MUSIC, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 07-56567.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted April 15, 2008.
Filed April 22, 2008.
Bruce Ameil Williams, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Robert A. Jacobs, Esq., Manatt Phelps and Phillips, New York, NY, Zoey Kohn, Esq., Manatt Phelps and Phillips, Los An-geles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: B. FLETCHER, FISHER and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
This is an appeal of the district court's order granting defendant — appellee's motion to dismiss the complaint.
The Clerk shall file appellant's untimely response to the court's February 19, 2008 order to show cause, received on March 20, 2008.
A review of the record, the opening brief, and appellant's response to the court's February 19, 2008 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.
All pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.