Court Opinion

ID: 2965018
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:14.556463+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:52.144651
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1810

                                    FRIEDRICH LU,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              DAVID CHRISTIANI, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. Richard Stearns, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

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

                                 ____________________

            Friedrich Lu on brief pro se.
            ____________
            Susan M. Donnelly,  B.B.O. and Murphy  & Riley, P.C. on  brief for
            __________________________     _____________________
        appellees.

                                 ____________________

                                  December 18, 1997
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.    Upon careful  review  of the  briefs  and
                 __________

            record,  we  conclude   that  the  district  court   properly

            dismissed  appellant's amended complaint  because it  did not

            state  a  cognizable  federal  claim.   To  the  extent  that

            appellant  attempts to  raise other  issues  in this  appeal,

            those issues do not merit further comment.

                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________   ___

                                         -2-