76 F3d 387 O'Brien v. United States Department of Justice
76 F.3d 387
Leda O'BRIEN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; Janet Reno, Attorney
General; Ted Kennedy; Nancy Reagan; Barbara Bush, First
Lady; Bruce Babbitt; Weldon Kennedy, FBI Agent; Farmers
Insurance Company; Truck Insurance Exchange; State of
Arizona; Fife Symington, Governor; Grant Woods, Attorney
General; Church of Latter Day Saints; City of Phoenix;
Frank Fairbanks, City Manager, Agent of the City of Phoenix;
Dennis Garrett, Chief of Police, Agent of the City of
Phoenix; Rick Romley, County Attorney, Agent of the County
of Maricopa; Joe Arpaio, County Sheriff; Andy Williams;
Johnny Mathis; Neil Diamond; Eddie Basha, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 95-16617.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 23, 1996.*
Decided Jan. 25, 1996.
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Before: ALARCON, HALL and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
We affirm the district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of Leda O'Brien's action for the reasons set forth in the district court's order filed July 13, 1995.1
We deny appellees' request for attorney's fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. See Branson v. Nott, 62 F.3d 287, 293 (9th Cir.1995).
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4. Accordingly, O'Brien's motion for oral argument is denied
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
We decline to consider O'Brien's argument, raised for the first time in her reply brief, that the district court improperly imposed Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 sanctions