Opinion
No. 08-16876.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).
Filed December 10, 2008.
Fred A. Whitaker, Oakland, CA, pro se.
Thomas A. Blake, Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Phyllis J. Hamilton, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 3:08-cv-01618-PJH.
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 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 and the order denying appellant's motion for reconsideration.
Appellant's request for oral argument is denied.