Unpublished Disposition, 921 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 921 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1989)

Jirik PAREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.MANAGEMENT OF GENERAL ATOMICS, Successors of GeneralAtomics, Chevron Oil Company of San Francisco,Gray, Cary, Ames & Frye, a LawCorporation, James Pat Hogan,et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 89-55826.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 7, 1990.* Decided Dec. 13, 1990.

Before WALLACE, O'SCANNLAIN and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Jirik Parez appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his complaint as facially meritless. Appellees have made no appearance. We affirm.

Parez filed the first in a series of three complaints in March 1989. Pursuant to Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to present a clear and concise statement of a claim upon which relief could be granted. Parez v. General Atomics, No. 89-0427 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 1989). Parez filed his second complaint immediately thereafter, and the district court dismissed that action without prejudice as facially meritless under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Parez v. Management of General Atomics, No. 89-0552 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 1988). Parez filed his third complaint less than two weeks later; the district court dismissed that complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) with prejudice; and Parez filed this timely appeal. Parez v. General Atomics, No. 89-0683 (S.D. Cal. May 4, 1989).

Although we are sympathetic to any suffering that Parez may have endured, we conclude that the district court was not in error in determining that Parez has failed to allege sufficient grounds for federal jurisdiction or a claim upon which relief may be granted.

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a), Ninth Circuit R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit R. 36-3