Notice: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 Provides That Dispositions Other Than Opinions or Orders Designated for Publication Are Not Precedential and Should Not Be Cited Except when Relevant Under the Doctrines of Law of the Case, Res Judicata, or Collateral Estoppel, 42 F.3d 1404 (9th Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 42 F.3d 1404 (9th Cir. 1994) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.28235 CLEARLAKE RD; 90010 Prairie Road Units 103 and 27C, Defendants,Bobby J. Stroup; Linda Stroup, Claimants-Appellants

No. 94-35527.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 14, 1994.^* Decided Nov. 25, 1994.

Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, GOODWIN and NORRIS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM^**

Bobby and Linda Stroup appeal pro se the magistrate judge's order denying their motion for return of seized property. We lack jurisdiction to review the magistrate judge's order. See Serine v. Peterson, 989 F.2d 371, 372-73 (9th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, this appeal is

DISMISSED.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.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 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.