Case Name: John A. MERZWEILER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-07-10
Citations: 285 F. App'x 418
Docket Number: No. 06-56421
Parties: John A. MERZWEILER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 285
Pages: 418–418

Head Matter:
John A. MERZWEILER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 06-56421.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 1, 2008.
Filed July 10, 2008.
John A. Merzweiler, Huntington Beach, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Carol A. Chen, Esq., Office of the U-.S. Attorney Civil & Tax Divisions, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
John A. Merzweiler appeals pro se from the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendant in Merzweiler's lawsuit, arising from the termination of his employment with the United Statés Postal Service. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Albano v. Norwest Fin. Haw., Inc., 244 F.3d 1061, 1063 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.
We agree with the district court that the Office of Special Counsel's decision finding no jurisdiction was correct for the reasons stated by the district court.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.