May 2, 1994
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________


        No. 94-1024 

                                  THOMAS F. KENNEDY,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.


                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                 [Hon. Frank H. Freedman, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                          __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                              Torruella, Selya and Stahl,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Robert H. Astor and Astor & Minardi on brief for appellant.
            _______________     _______________
            Donald  K. Stern,  United States  Attorney, and Karen  L. Goodwin,
            ________________                                _________________
        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.


                                 ____________________


                                 ____________________






















                      Per  Curiam.  Plaintiff-appellant Thomas F. Kennedy
                      ___________

            appeals  from  the grant  of  summary  judgment  in favor  of

            defendant-appellee United  States of American.   "We review a

            grant  of  summary  judgment  de  novo,  employing  the  same

            criteria  incumbent  upon the  district  court  in the  first

            instance."  Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Walbrook Ins. Co., 7
                        _________________________    _________________

            F.3d  1047, 1050 (1st Cir. 1993) (citing Pedraza v. Shell Oil
                                                     _______    _________

            Co., 942 F.2d 48,  50 (1st Cir. 1991),  cert. denied, 112  S.
            ___                                     ____________

            Ct. 993 (1992)).  We have reviewed the  briefs of the parties

            and  the record  on appeal.   We  affirm essentially  for the

            reasons stated in the magistrate's report and recommendation,

            dated April 13, 1993, and the district court's memorandum and

            order, dated December 15, 1993. 

                      Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. R. 27.1.
                      ________   ___