875 F. 2d 319 - Yang v. McCarthy
875 F2d 319 Yang v. McCarthy
875 F.2d 319
Unpublished Disposition
Abraham T. YANG, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Daniel McCARTHY; Robert Rees; Mail Room Sergeant,
Defendants-Appellees.
Abraham T. YANG, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Daniel McCARTHY; Robert Rees; D.B. Avilla, Defendants-Appellees.
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Advertisement
Nos. 87-1914, 87-1915.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted* May 8, 1989.
Decided May 10, 1989.
Before WALLACE and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and JAMES M. BURNS,** District Judge.
ORDER
Yang appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of McCarthy, Rees, Dooman, and Markey, and the denial of Yang's motions for summary judgment in Yang's two actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1342. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291. For the reasons stated by the magistrate, whose findings and recommendations were adopted in full by the district court and formed the basis of its orders, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
Note: 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 Rule 36-3.