Court Opinion

ID: 2963456
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:10:07.132203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:21:05.342610
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          May 30, 1995
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 94-1944

                                  ANTHONY SOLIMINE,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                                ORTHO MCNEIL, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                        FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                       [Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge]
                                           ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                          Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Anthony Solimine on brief pro se.
            ________________

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.  We have reviewed  appellant's brief and the
                 __________

            record  on appeal.   We  affirm  essentially for  the reasons

            stated in  the district  court's memorandum, dated  April 26,

            1994.

                 Appellant's "motion  for leave  to file  up to  ten (10)

            page memorandum on supplemental  authorities and an appendix"

            and   "motion  for   leave  to   file  brief   memorandum  of

            supplemental  authorities"  are denied.   They  are extremely
                                            _______

            tardy and, in any event, present nothing of merit.

                 Appellant's motion for oral argument is denied.
                                                         _______

                 The district court's order of dismissal is affirmed.
                                                            _________

                                         -2-