Kolocotronis v. Canadian Lotteries

Full title: Cyril KOLOCOTRONIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CANADIAN LOTTERIES; Wonder…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 21, 2001

4 F. App'x 455 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

4 Fed.Appx. 455 (9th Cir. 2001) Cyril KOLOCOTRONIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CANADIAN LOTTERIES; Wonder Lottery; U.S. Attorney in Seattle; Mercantile First Bank, St. Louis; U.S. Bank, Seattle; Fulton State Hospital Patients' Accounts, Defendants-Appellees. No. 99-35926. D.C. No. CV-99-00418-BJR. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. February 21, 2001

Submitted February 12, 2001. ¹

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Plaintiff brought § 1983 action against lottery, alleging it was fraudulent, and seeking the return of $175 he spent playing the lottery. The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Barbara J. Rothstein, Chief Judge, dismissed action, and plaintiff appealed. The Court of Appeals held that plaintiff's allegations were too vague and conclusory to state a civil rights claim.

Affirmed.

Page 456.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Barbara J. Rothstein, Chief Judge, Presiding.

Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ²

2 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cyril Kolocotronis appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against the Canadian Lottery, alleging the Canadian Lottery is fraudulent, and seeking the return of $175 he spent playing the lottery. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

Upon de novo review, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Kolocotronis' action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). See Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1154, 119 S.Ct. 1058, 143 L.Ed.2d 63 (1999). Even after amending his complaint, his allegations were too vague and conclusory to state a civil rights claim. See Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir.1982).

Kolocotronis' remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED.