122 F3d 1069 Arias v. Chaffey Community College District
122 F.3d 1069
Arnold D. ARIAS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CHAFFEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT; Jerry W. Young; James
E. Barton; Isabel Scully; Trudy Thomas; Stephen
W. Menzel, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 96-55228.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 25, 1997**
Decided Aug. 29, 1997.
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, No. CV-95-00001-RT; Robert J. Timlin, District Judge, Presiding.
Before: SCHROEDER, KOZINSKI, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
Arnold D. Arias appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of defendants in Arias's action alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, & 1986, race discrimination, and state claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
After a de novo review, see Miller v. County of Santa Cruz, 39 F.3d 1030, 1032 (9th Cir.1994) (res judicata); Washington v. Garrett, 10 F.3d 1421, 1428 (9th Cir.1993) (statute of limitations); Allah v. Superior Court, 871 F.2d 887, 890 (9th Cir.1989) (lack of subject matter jurisdiction), we affirm for the reasons stated in the magistrate judge's report and recommendation filed on December 14, 1995, which was adopted by the district court in an order entered on January 17, 1996.
Arias contends that he was entitled to a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment. Because no question of material fact exists in this case, a jury trial is unnecessary. See Sengupta v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 804 F.2d 1072, 1077 n. 3 (9th Cir.1986).
All of Arias's pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.