USCA1 Opinion

May 25, 1993

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 92-2409
JAMES M. MOONEY,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, ETC.,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Martin F. Loughlin, Senior U.S. District Judge]
__________________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Cyr and Stahl,
Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
James M. Mooney on brief pro se.

_______________
Peter E. Papps, Acting United
______________
Witt, Assistant United States
____
Disposition, for appellee.

States Attorney, and

Attorney,

on

Gretchen L
__________
Motion for Summ

____________________
____________________

Per Curiam.
___________
parties'

submissions

We

and

are

have

reviewed

persuaded

that

the

record and

the

district

co

properly dismissed the instant civil action for lack of subject mat
jurisdiction.

Moreover,

filed, transfer to
justice under

the Federal Circuit

28 U.S.C.

district court is
orders

where appellant's complaint

1631.

affirmed.
________

denying his motions

was not

judgment of

multiple objections to

for oral argument

for authentication are denied.

______

tim

in the interests

Accordingly, the

Appellant's

was not

and appellant's mot