Leopold Cardenas, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Robert Wright; United Parcel Service; Marts, C/o,defendants-appellees, 120 F.3d 268 (9th Cir. 1997)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 120 F.3d 268 (9th Cir. 1997)

Submitted July 14, 1997**Decided July 17, 1997


Before HUG, Chief Judge, KOZINSKI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM* 

Leopold Cardenas, a Washington state prisoner at the time the action was filed, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deprivation of property. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

We have jurisdiction only over final orders of the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Without a Rule 54(b) certification, orders dismissing some but not all of the claims are not final orders appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Frank Briscoe Co. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 776 F.2d 1414, 1416 (9th Cir. 1985). Here, the district court only dismissed two of the three defendants in Cardenas' action. A review of the record shows that there is no Rule 54(b) certification.

Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal. See Frank Briscoe Co., 776 F.2d at 1416.

DISMISSED.1 

 **

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See 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

 1

Given our disposition of the appeal, we deny appellee's motion to file an answering brief as moot