| Keyword |
Case |
Docket |
Date: Filed /
Added |
(10906 bytes)
(7070 bytes)
UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
ORDER AND JUDGMENT(*)
Before PORFILIO, KELLY and
HENRY, Circuit Judges.(**)
Mr. Nollmeyer, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the
district court's dismissal with prejudice of his civil rights action against the
United States for failure to state a claim, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and against the
Delaware State Police for lack of personal jurisdiction, Fed. R. Civ. 12(b)(2).
We construe Mr. Nollmeyer's docketing statement filed in this court on
September 23, 1997, as the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal from the
district court's order of April 14, 1997 dismissing the action and the September
2, 1997 denial of post-judgment motions. See Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244,
248-49 (1992); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1); 4(a)(4)(C). We have reviewed the record and
affirm for substantially the same reasons relied upon by the magistrate judge,
although we remand for the district court to enter judgment dismissing without
prejudice the claims against the Delaware State Police, as these claims were
dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. See Madara v. Hall, 916 F.2d 1510,
1514 n. 1 (11th Cir. 1990). To the extent Mr. Nollmeyer raises new issues in his
appeal not addressed below, we deem them waived and do not address them. See
Sac & Fox Nation v. Hanson, 47 F.3d 1061, 1063 (10th Cir.), cert. denied,
516
U.S. 810 (1995). We construe Mr. Nollmeyer's continued filings with this court
as motions to file supplemental briefs and deny them.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
Entered for the Court
PER CURIAM
FOOTNOTES
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
*. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
**. After examining the briefs and the
appellate record, this three-judge
panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material
assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th
Cir. R. 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
| Keyword |
Case |
Docket |
Date: Filed /
Added |
(10906 bytes)
(7070 bytes)
Comments to: WebMaster,
ca10 [at] washburnlaw.edu.
Updated: July 31, 1998.
HTML markup © 1998, Washburn University School of Law.
URL: http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/1998/07/97-2306.htm.