Clark v. Dept of the Army

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50258 Summary Calendar LONNIE D. CLARK; ET AL., Plaintiffs, KARLA ROLEN CLARK, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT; FORT WORTH MID-BRAZOS PROJECT; LOUIS A. BRUNETT, Reservoir Manager; UNKNOWN GOVERNMENT AGENTS, Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-99-CV-20 - - - - - - - - - - November 27, 2000 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Karla Rolen Clark appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in her civil rights complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3). She argues that the above-named defendants-appellees conspired to deprive her of her due process and equal protection rights by threatening to * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 00-50258 -2- revoke her boathouse permit. She also argues that the Army Corp of Engineers’ regulations governing boathouse permits violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Finally, Clark asserts that the district court erred by denying her motion to have an independent arbitrator appointed to settle the dispute over the permit. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties, and we find no reversible error. Clark’s due process, equal protection, and ADA claims are without merit. See Augustine v. Doe, 740 F.2d 322, 327 (5th Cir. 1984); Forsyth v. Barr, 19 F.3d 1527, 1533 (5th Cir. 1994). Additionally, Clark has failed to show that the district court erred by denying her request for the appointment of an arbitrator. See United Steel Workers of Am. v. Am. Mfg. Co., 363 U.S. 574, 582 (1960). The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.