Rayburn v. Webb

Ninth Circuit

Rayburn v. Webb

11 F. App'x 875

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 6, 2001

DocketNo. 00-35601; D.C. No. CV-00-00015-JWS

StatusPublished

This text of 11 F. App'x 875 (Rayburn v. Webb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rayburn v. Webb, 11 F. App'x 875 (9th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM²

Charla A. Rayburn appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of her action al[876]*876leging violations of the Privacy Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Upon our de novo review, we affirm the district court. See Dittman v. State of Cal., 191 F.3d 1020, 1026-27 (9th Cir.1999), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 2717, 147 L.Ed.2d 982 (2000); Wilson v. A.H. Belo Corp., 87 F.3d 393, 396 (9th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM²

Charla A. Rayburn appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of her action al[876]*876leging violations of the Privacy Act. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Upon our de novo review, we affirm the district court. See Dittman v. State of Cal., 191 F.3d 1020, 1026-27 (9th Cir.1999), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 120 S.Ct. 2717, 147 L.Ed.2d 982 (2000); Wilson v. A.H. Belo Corp., 87 F.3d 393, 396 (9th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F. App'x 875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rayburn-v-webb-ca9-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack