IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-20085
(Summary Calendar)
PAUL MAPLES,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
PASADENA INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-96-CV-1753)
July 15, 1997
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Paul Maples asks us to reverse the
judgment of the district court dismissing his original and amended
complaints pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
Specifically, Maples presents for our review alleged reversible
error by the district court in its determination that Maples had
neither a protected property nor liberty interest and did not state
a “First Amendment retaliation claim.” Additionally, in his
Statement of the Case on appeal, Maples makes reference to the
court’s failure to address his intentional infliction of emotional
distress claim and the court’s ruling regarding the statute of
limitations.
In our de novo review we have carefully studied the record on
appeal and the facts, law, and arguments presented by counsel in
their briefs to this court. We have also considered the patiently
exhaustive discussion and explanation of this case as set forth in
the Memorandum and Order of the district court filed December 24,
1996. Based on our review, we are persuaded that the district
court correctly analyzed this case and the pleadings in light of
the facts and the law and reached the correct conclusions for the
right reasons. We would serve no useful purpose by writing
further, given the disposition of this case by the district court.
Consequently, the rulings and judgment of the district court are,
in all respects,
AFFIRMED.
2