FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

DEC 11 1997

PATRICK FISHER
Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
                                                                      
MARY ELIZABETH SEVERANCE,

	Plaintiff-Appellant,		
v.	No. 97-1278	
GALE NORTON, Attorney General; MARLENE LANGFIELD; GARY CLYMAN; ELIZABETH A. WEISPHAUL; CRISTINA VALENCIA; DAVID BROUGHAM; DAVID H. ZOOK; WILLIAM DAVID LYTLE; JOHN J. KEILBACH; ROBERT H. RAWLINGS; DANIEL L. CORSENTINO; CHIP DE LUCA; CONNIE L. PETERSON; PETER W. BOOTH; ALEX MARTINEZ; WILLIAM F. DOWNING; O. EDWARD SCHLATTER, Magistrate Judge; DAVID A. COLE; EUGENE T. HALAAS; JOHN R. TRACEY; CHRIS WOODKA; JOHN W. ANDERSON; GUS SANDSTROM; JOHN A. SUTHERS; JEANIE M. SMITH; SANDRA WELLS; AURELIO SISNEROS; AARON T. WAGNER; EDWARD JONES, registered agent of R.J. Locksmith; All Does 1 to 99,

	Defendants-Appellees.		
                                                                     	ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
                                                                     
Before BALDOCK, EBEL, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.**
                                                                      
	Plaintiff Mary Elizabeth Severance, appearing pro se as a self-proclaimed sovereign citizen, filed this civil rights action in the district court alleging numerous Defendants, including judges, law enforcement officials, and government attorneys, violated her constitutional rights.  The district court entered an order dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint as violative of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2), and as barred by the doctrines of judicial immunity, res judicata, and collateral estoppel.  The district court’s order also prohibited Plaintiff from filing any complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado without written leave of court unless represented by counsel.  Plaintiff appeals the district court’s order.  Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
	We have reviewed the parties’ briefs, pleadings, motions, and the entire record before us, and affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court’s order dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint and barring her from future filings.
	AFFIRMED.
							Entered for the Court,
							Per Curiam