July 18, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 96-1249
RICHARD A. COLE, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
MARIA FABIANO, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellants.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Selya, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges.
Richard A. Cole, M.D. F.A.C.P. on brief pro se.
Hugh C. Carlin, Gross, Shuman, Brizdle & Gilfillan, P.C., Lee T.
Gesmer, and Lucash, Gesmer & Updegrove on brief for appellees.
Per Curiam. Upon careful review of the record and
appellate briefs, it clearly appears that no substantial
question is presented for review.
Because appellant did not ask the district court
for a transfer and made no showing that a transfer would be
in the interest of justice, we conclude that the district
court did not abuse its discretion in failing to order one.
See 28 U.S.C. 1406(a); Cote v. Wadel, 796 F.2d 981, 984
(7th Cir. 1986); see also Mulcahy v. Guertler, 416 F.Supp.
1083, 1086 (D.Mass. 1976).
Appellant's remaining arguments likewise are
without merit: he had ample opportunity to respond to
defendants' motion to dismiss; he never sought leave to amend
his complaint, and, in any case, amendment would not cure the
defects in venue; and neither defendants' credibility on the
issue of service, nor appellant's failure to obtain a copy of
the local rules, suggests to us any reason to reverse.
Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
-3-