From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mixon v. Pliler

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 21, 2006
214 F. App'x 662 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

No. 06-15890.

Submitted December 18, 2006.

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

Filed December 21, 2006.

George E. Mixon, Lancaster, CA, pro se.

Brahim George Seikaly, AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Morrison C. England, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-00-01576-MCE.

Before: GOODWIN, McKEOWN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

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

A review of the record and the response to the court's September 21, 2006 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).

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district court's judgment.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Mixon v. Pliler

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 21, 2006
214 F. App'x 662 (9th Cir. 2006)
Case details for

Mixon v. Pliler

Case Details

Full title:George E. MIXON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Cheryl PLILER; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 21, 2006

Citations

214 F. App'x 662 (9th Cir. 2006)

Citing Cases

Steward v. Thumser

In Clement, plaintiff had set forth numerous instances where prison officials had used pepper spray to harm…