Filed: Apr. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-20726 Conference Calendar INNOCENT OGUAGHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RICHARD CRAVENER, Immigration and Naturalization Service, District Director, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-3944 - - - - - - - - - - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Innocent Oguagha appeals from the distr
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-20726 Conference Calendar INNOCENT OGUAGHA, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RICHARD CRAVENER, Immigration and Naturalization Service, District Director, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-3944 - - - - - - - - - - April 11, 2001 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Innocent Oguagha appeals from the distri..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-20726
Conference Calendar
INNOCENT OGUAGHA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RICHARD CRAVENER, Immigration and
Naturalization Service, District
Director,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CV-3944
- - - - - - - - - -
April 11, 2001
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Innocent Oguagha appeals from the district court’s denial of
his postjudgment motion to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint
by adding a defendant. On March 1, 2000, this court dismissed as
frivolous Oguagha’s appeal from the district court’s dismissal of
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to exhaust his
administrative remedies. Oguagha v. Cravener, No. 99-20687 (5th
Cir. Mar. 1, 2000). Because of this court’s dismissal of
Oguagha’s complaint as frivolous, there was no pending complaint
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-20726
-2-
to which Oguagha could add a defendant at the time of the
district court’s denial of the motion. Accordingly, the district
court did not abuse its discretion by denying Oguagha’s request.
See Briddle v. Scott,
63 F.3d 364, 379 (5th Cir. 1995).
Oguagha’s appeal from the district court’s ruling is without
merit and is thus frivolous. His appeal is DISMISSED on this
basis. See Howard v. King,
707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983);
5th Cir. R. 42.2. Oguagha’s pending motions in this court are
DENIED.
While Oguagha’s appeal was pending in this court, the
appellee, who was not served below, filed a motion to make an
appearance in the case along with a motion to dismiss Oguagha’s
appeal as frivolous. These motions are DENIED as moot.