Case Name: Robin S. MARTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF the TREASURY; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-12-15
Citations: 303 F. App'x 478
Docket Number: No. 08-56581
Parties: Robin S. MARTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF the TREASURY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 303
Pages: 478–478

Head Matter:
Robin S. MARTIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF the TREASURY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-56581.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 1, 2008.
Filed Dec. 15, 2008.
Robin S. Martin, Pasadena, CA, pro se.
Alarice M. Medrano, Esquire, USLA— Office of the U.S. Attorney, Paul C. Epstein, Esquire, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General (LA), Timothy J. Harris, Esquire, Charlston Revich & Wollitz, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, David B. Monks, Klinedinst P.C., San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: GOODWIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
The 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 appellant's opening brief 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 is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.