IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11395
Conference Calendar
JAMES REEDOM,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BOBBY HOLMAN; BRENDA HOLMAN,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:00-CV-1687-E
--------------------
June 13, 2001
Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
James Reedom appeals pro se from the district court's
dismissal without prejudice of his complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a).
Reedom has failed to adequately brief how the district court
erred in dismissing his complaint by failing to provide argument
and authorities in support of his claim. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993)("arguments must be briefed to
be preserved"); see also Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9).
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-11395
-2-
Reedom argues that the district court judge was biased and
should have been recused. Other than making general and
conclusional allegations of bias, Reedom has produced nothing
that would cause a reasonable man to doubt the district court's
impartiality. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(a); Levitt v. University of
Texas at El Paso, 847 F.2d 221, 226 (5th Cir. 1988).
This appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous.
See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983).
Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R.
42.2.
DISMISSED.