IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-10429
Summary Calendar
HAROLD GRAY HAYS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(4:95-CV-741-G)
- - - - - - - - - -
December 20, 1996
Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Harold Gray Hays, #55111-079, appeals from the district
court's grant of a motion for summary judgment in favor of the
defendants in his suit under the Tucker Act. Hays contends that
the district court erred in holding that this case was barred by
res judicata because of a district court order denying a Fed.
R. Crim. P. 41(e) motion for return of seized property previously
filed by Hays against the United States.
1
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
The district court did not err in finding that all of the
technical requirement of res judicata have been met. See Travelers
Ins. Co. v. St. Jude Hosp. of Kenner, Louisiana, Inc., 37 F.3d 193,
195 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1696 (1995). Hays’
action and appeal are malicious. See Bailey v. Johnson, 846 F.2d
1019, 1021 (5th Cir. 1988). The appeal is DISMISSED. 5th Cir.
Rule 42.2.
We caution Hays that any additional frivolous or malicious
appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To
avoid sanctions, Hays is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous or malicious.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.