Dempsey v. White

Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For The FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 93-1164

JOHN B. DEMPSEY,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

VANNA WHITE,

Defendant, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. A. David Mazzone, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Torruella, Cyr and Boudin, Circuit Judges.

John B. Dempsey on brief pro se.

June 11, 1993

Per Curiam. The only question presented by this

appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in

denying pro se appellant's motion under Fed. R. Civ. P.

60(b). See Duffy v. Clippinger, 857 F.2d 877, 879 (1st Cir.

1988). Appellant's allegations that he is entitled to relief

from judgment because of excusable neglect, Rule 60(b)(1),

and newly discovered evidence, Rule 60(b)(2), are frivolous.

It is clear that appellant's profferings - that he failed to

cite certain statutes, propound certain theories, offer

certain amendments, or refer to certain non-legal

publications - are merely attempts to reargue the merits of

his case. We affirmed the dismissal of appellant's complaint

as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. 1915(d). Dempsey v. White,

No. 91-1253, slip op. Mar. 29, 1991. There was no error of

judgment on the part of the trial court.

Affirmed. Appellant's pending motion for a gag

order restraining order is denied.

- 2 -