Court Opinion

ID: 31599
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 10:19:22+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:43:43.948409
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  June 13, 2003
                        ____________________
                                                         Charles R. Fulbruge III
                             02-20733                            Clerk
                         Summary Calendar
                       ____________________

                     UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee,

                              versus

                     ALFRED CHARLES HABELMAN,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                          (H-02-CV-1328)
_________________________________________________________________

Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Alfred Habelman, pro se, appeals the 90-day confiscation of

his pilot’s certificate in 2002, pursuant to an enforcement action

brought by the Government.   Habelman contested the suspension of

his pilot’s certificate in earlier proceedings; the suspension was

affirmed. Habelman v. Garvey, No. 98-60710 (5th Cir. 19 July 1999)

(unpublished).   Once the Government sued to enforce that judgment,

Habelman complied voluntarily and the district court entered final

     *
        Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
judgment. Habelman’s contentions belong to the original litigation

and cannot be heard by this court when considering the enforcement

at issue.   E.g., In re Gibraltar Resources, Inc., 210 F.3d 573, 576

(5th Cir. 2000).

                                                        AFFIRMED

                                  2