89 F3d 823 Cole v. Fabiano

89 F.3d 823

Richard A. COLE, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
Maria FABIANO, et al., Defendants, Appellants.

No. 96-1249.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

July 18, 1996.

NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished opinions may be cited only in related cases.

Richard A. Cole, M.D. F.A.C.P. on brief pro se.

Hugh C. Carlin, Gross, Shuman, Brizdle & Gilfillan, P.C., Lee T. Gesmer, and Lucash, Gesmer & Updegrove on brief for appellees.

D.Mass.

AFFIRMED.

Before SELYA, CYR and BOUDIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

Upon careful review of the record and appellate briefs, it clearly appears that no substantial question is presented for review.

2

Because appellant did not ask the district court for a transfer and made no showing that a transfer would be in the interest of justice, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to order one. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Cote v. Wadel, 796 F.2d 981, 984 (7th Cir.1986); see also Mulcahy v. Guertler, 416 F.Supp. 1083, 1086 (D.Mass.1976).

3

Appellant's remaining arguments likewise are without merit: he had ample opportunity to respond to defendants' motion to dismiss; he never sought leave to amend his complaint, and, in any case, amendment would not cure the defects in venue; and neither defendants' credibility on the issue of service, nor appellant's failure to obtain a copy of the local rules, suggests to us any reason to reverse.

4

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.