March 16, 1994        [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT


                                 ___________________


          No. 93-2181

            


                           COMMUNITY NATIONAL BANK, ET AL.,
                                Plaintiff, Appellees,

                                          v.

                              CENTERPOINT BANK, ET AL.,
                                Defendants, Appellees,
                                   ________________

                                 REGINA M. KELLEHER,
                           Intervenor Plaintiff-Appellant.


                                  __________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE


                    [Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ___________________

                                        Before
                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,
                                         ___________
                        Torruella and Boudin, Circuit Judges.
                                              ______________

                                 ___________________

               Regina M. Kelleher on brief pro se.
               __________________
               Martha V. Gordon, Nelson, Kinder, Mosseau & Gordon on  brief
               ________________  ______  ______  _______   ______
          for appellee.



                                  __________________

                                  __________________





















                      Per   Curiam.      Plaintiff/appellant  Regina   M.
                      ____________

            Kelleher,  appeals,  pro  se,  the dismissal  of  her  second

            amended civil complaint by the district court.  The complaint

            alleges a  violation of the Racketeer  Influenced and Corrupt

            Organizations  Act  (RICO),  18  U.S.C.    1961-1968,  and  a

            pendent  state  law  claim  for  tortious  interference  with

            business  relations.    The   district  court  dismissed  the

            complaint  on the  grounds that  plaintiff lacks  standing to

            assert a RICO claim.

                      We have reviewed the parties' briefs and the record

            below  and affirm for  essentially the reasons  stated in the

            district court's  order.  We  add that although  the district

            court did not specifically address the pendent state claim in

            its   order,   the   court's   blanket   dismissal  seemingly

            encompasses all claims in the second amended complaint.   The

            district  court appropriately  dismissed  the  pendent  claim

            without  reaching the merits.  As the Supreme Court has held,

            "when the  federal-law claims have dropped out of the lawsuit

            in its early  stages, and only  state-law claims remain,  the

            federal court should decline  the exercise of jurisdiction by

            dismissing  the  case  without prejudice."    Carnegie-Mellon
                                                          _______________

            Univ.  v. Cohill, 484 U.S.  343, 350 (1988);  see also United
            _____     ______                              ________ ______

            Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715, 726 (1966).  
            ____________    _____

                      Affirmed.
                      ________





                                         -2-