USCA1 Opinion
May 30, 1995
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 94-1944
ANTHONY SOLIMINE,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
ORTHO MCNEIL, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Rya W. Zobel, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Anthony Solimine on brief pro se. ________________
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. We have reviewed appellant's brief and the __________
record on appeal. We affirm essentially for the reasons
stated in the district court's memorandum, dated April 26,
1994.
Appellant's "motion for leave to file up to ten (10)
page memorandum on supplemental authorities and an appendix"
and "motion for leave to file brief memorandum of
supplemental authorities" are denied. They are extremely _______
tardy and, in any event, present nothing of merit.
Appellant's motion for oral argument is denied. _______
The district court's order of dismissal is affirmed. _________
-2-