From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Love v. Hensley

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 9, 2008
292 F. App'x 628 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 06-56110.

Submitted August 26, 2008.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed September 9, 2008.

Alfredrick Love, Imperial, CA, pro se.

Attorney General CAS, Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-06-01375-DMS.

Before: SCHROEDER, KLEINFELD, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Alfredrick Love, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action pursuant to the screening provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A. We dismiss.

We lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal because the district court's order dismissing Love's complaint and granting leave to amend did not constitute the final judgment in this case. See WMX Technologies, Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc).

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Love v. Hensley

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 9, 2008
292 F. App'x 628 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Love v. Hensley

Case Details

Full title:Alfredrick LOVE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. K.R. HENSLEY; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 9, 2008

Citations

292 F. App'x 628 (9th Cir. 2008)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Saul

Further, although Petitioner threatens multiple times to appeal the Order, the Court notes for Petitioner's…