OpenJurist

917 F2d 1307 Siler v. Dillingham Ship Repair

917 F.2d 1307

Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Stanley R. SILER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DILLINGHAM SHIP REPAIR, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-35320.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 7, 1990.*
Decided Nov. 9, 1990.

Before EUGENE A. WRIGHT, POOLE and DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

The judgment of the district court by its order filed on April 5, 1990, is affirmed. The district court properly adopted the findings and recommendation of the magistrate. Siler's complaint is unintelligible. Moreover, as the administrative law judge concluded in the decision and order on motion for summary judgment of October 13, 1989, Siler's claim is time-barred.

2

The unrefuted facts show that Siler related his injury of July 7, 1983 to his employment in consultation with his physician in July 1985. He failed to file a claim until August 24, 1988. He should have filed his claim against Dillingham Ship Repair no later than July 31, 1986.

3

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4