Case Name: James A. MILLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PHOENIX; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-09
Citations: 183 F. App'x 691
Docket Number: No. 05-16739
Parties: James A. MILLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PHOENIX; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: CANBY, T.G. NELSON and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 183
Pages: 691–692

Head Matter:
James A. MILLS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PHOENIX; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 05-16739.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 5, 2006.
Filed June 9, 2006.
James A. Mills, Phoenix, AZ, pro se.
John T. Masterson, Esq., Jennifer L. Holsman, Jones Skelton & Hochuli, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendants-Appellees.
Before: CANBY, T.G. NELSON and KLEINFELD, 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 April 14, 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.
All pending motions are denied as moot.
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.