Professional Documents
Culture Documents
RUSSELL W. CHAVEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
No. 11-2203
(D.C. No. 1:11-CV-00601-LFG-KBM)
(D. N.M.)
Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, PORFILIO, Senior Circuit Judge, and MURPHY,
Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this
appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral
estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with
Fed. R App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
Our jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. 1291. We review the district courts
dismissal de novo. Nanomantube, 631 F.3d at 1151. In so doing, we afford all of
Mr. Chavezs pro se filings a solicitous construction. Van Deelen v. Johnson,
497 F.3d 1151, 1153 n.1 (10th Cir. 2007).
We have undertaken a thorough review of the parties briefs, the record, and
the applicable law and conclude that Mr. Chavez has not identified any reversible
error in this case. We therefore AFFIRM the judgment of the district court for
substantially the same reasons stated by the magistrate judge (sitting by the consent
of the parties) in his September 14, 2011, memorandum opinion and order.
-3-