USCA1 Opinion
March 23, 1993 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________
No. 92-2386
FRANK J. CAMOSCIO,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AND
THE BOARD OF REGISTRATION IN PODIATRY,
Defendants, Appellees.
__________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
___________________
Before
Torruella, Cyr and Boudin
Circuit Judges.
______________
___________________
Frank J. Camoscio on brief pro se.
_________________
Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, and Beth D. Levi,
__________________ ______________
Assistant Attorney General, on Memorandum in Support of the
Motion for Summary Affirmance for appellees.
__________________
__________________
Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record in this
__________
case and are persuaded that this action, the appellant's
third against the defendant Board of Registration in
Podiatry, is frivolous, vexatious, and barred by res
___
judicata, the Rooker doctrine, and the statute of
________ ______
limitations. See Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413,
___ ______ __________________
416 (1923); Street v. Vose, 936 F.2d 38 (1st Cir. 1991)(per
______ ____
curiam). Accordingly, the appellees' motion for summary
disposition is allowed and the judgment dismissing the
instant complaint is affirmed. We further affirm the
district court's order enjoining the appellant from filing
any further actions without either obtaining leave of court
or the aid and signature of counsel.
-2-