Summary
finding questions raised on appeal so insubstantial as to not require further argument, and therefore finding appeal frivolous
Summary of this case from McCoy v. EnenmohOpinion
No. 08-56501.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed December 15, 2008.
Anthony James Martini, Newport Beach, CA, pro se.
Annette Martini, Newport Beach, CA, pro se.
Indira Joy Cameron-Banks, Assistant U.S., Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 8:07-cv-01395-DOC.
Before: GOODWIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
A review of the record and appellants' response to this court's order to show cause indicates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (stating standard). Indeed, we find this appeal frivolous.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's order dismissing the action without prejudice.