From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Voth v. Hall

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 24, 2008
286 F. App'x 344 (9th Cir. 2008)

Opinion

No. 08-35145.

Submitted July 24, 2008.

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

Frank E. Voth, Umatilla, OR, pro se.

Joseph Groshong, Trial Division, Salem, OR, for Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Ann L. Aiken, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-07-01260-TMC.

Before: SCHROEDER, LEAVY 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.


Appellees' motion for an extension of time to file the answering brief is granted. The Clerk shall file the answering brief received on July 3, 2008.

Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, this court hereby summarily affirms the district court's order denying appellant's motion for preliminary injunctive relief as moot. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857 (9th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (summary affirmance appropriate where result is clear from face of record).

All other pending motions are denied as moot.

Appellant's petition for writ of mandamus filed in this appeal on May 21, 2008 is denied.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Voth v. Hall

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 24, 2008
286 F. App'x 344 (9th Cir. 2008)
Case details for

Voth v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:Frank E. VOTH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Guy HALL; et al.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 24, 2008

Citations

286 F. App'x 344 (9th Cir. 2008)