From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Skurdal v. Deboo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 419
Dec 10, 2008
303 F. App'x 418 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 08-16695.

Submitted December 1, 2008.

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

Filed December 10, 2008.

Rodney Owen Skurdal, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Phillip A. Talbert, Assistant U.S., US-SAC-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:07-CV-01245-JAM.

Before: GOODWIN, CLIFTON and BEA, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM

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

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The Clerk shall amend the docket to reflect this status.

A review of the record and appellant's response to the 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).

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

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Skurdal v. Deboo

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 419
Dec 10, 2008
303 F. App'x 418 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Skurdal v. Deboo

Case Details

Full title:Rodney Owen SKURDAL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Kuma J. DEBOO…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Page 419

Date published: Dec 10, 2008

Citations

303 F. App'x 418 (9th Cir. 2008)