UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Filed 8/30/96
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
FELIPE A. RIVERA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 96-2012
(D.C. No. CIV-92-1264-MV)
SANDIA NATIONAL (D. N.M.)
LABORATORIES,
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRORBY, BARRETT, and EBEL, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict against him on
his various employment-related claims. He challenges discovery, evidentiary and
other rulings by the district court and seeks a new trial. He was represented by
counsel in the district court, but proceeds pro se on appeal.
Despite the liberal construction we give to pro se filings, an appellant’s pro
se status does not excuse his obligation to comply with the fundamental
requirements of appellate procedure. Ogden v. San Juan County, 32 F.3d 452,
455 (10th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 750 (1995). In his four-page
appellate brief, plaintiff makes only conclusory allegations of errors by the
district court. He provides neither citations to the record nor citations to legal
authority to support his positions. Moreover, he has not provided us with a
transcript of his trial. Under these circumstances, we cannot consider his
arguments on appeal. See Murrell v. Shalala, 43 F.3d 1388, 1389 n.2 (10th Cir.
1994)(perfunctory arguments failing to frame and develop an issue insufficient to
invoke appellate review); Brownlee v. Lear Siegler Management Servs. Corp., 15
F.3d 976, 977 (10th Cir.)(conclusory reference to district court error without
citation to legal authority not adequate appellate argument), cert. denied, 114 S.
Ct. 2743 (1994); United States v. Vasquez, 985 F.2d 491, 495 (10th Cir.
1993)(party’s failure to file trial transcript waives sufficiency of the evidence
issues and precludes review of evidentiary rulings); SEC v. Thomas, 965 F.2d
-2-
825, 827 (10th Cir. 1992)(court will not sift through record to find support for
appellant’s arguments).
AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
Entered for the Court
James E. Barrett
Senior Circuit Judge
-3-