Cole v. Fabiano

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[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]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-