Broemer v. Central Intelligence Agency

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUN 18 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT GLEN BROEMER, No. 08-56265 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:01-cv-04340-MMM- RZ v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; MEMORANDUM * et al., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding Submitted May 25, 2010 ** Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. Glen Broemer appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his action alleging that employees of the Central Intelligence Agency have been following him, threatening him, and physically injuring him for many years. We * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. McDonald v. Sun Oil Co., 548 F.3d 774, 778 (9th Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 129 S.Ct. 2825 (2009). We affirm. The district court properly granted summary judgment on the claims in Broemer’s fourth amended complaint because Broemer did not raise a triable issue as to whether he had been harmed by the defendants. See Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 952 n.2 (9th Cir. 2007) (explaining that a “conclusory, self-serving affidavit, lacking detailed facts and any supporting evidence, is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Broemer’s remaining contentions, including his challenges to dismissals of claims and defendants from his previous complaints, are unpersuasive. All pending motions are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 08-56265