IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-10846
Conference Calendar
MICHAEL R. REDLICH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
DOERNER, SAUNDERS,
DANIEL, & ANDERSON, L.L.P.,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:02-CV-1344-G
--------------------
February 19, 2003
Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Michael Redlich appeals from the district court’s dismissal
of his complaint alleging claims of employment termination and
obstruction of justice. The district court dismissed Redlich’s
complaint for failure to amend his complaint to include a
statement of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to FED. R.
CIV. P. 8(a).
Redlich has not challenged in this court the district
court’s reasons for dismissing his complaint. Accordingly, it is
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-10846
-2-
as if Redlich had not appealed the judgment. See Brinkmann v.
Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.
1987). Redlich has filed a motion to supplement his original
brief; however, the proposed supplemental brief is merely a
continuation of the merits of his complaint and fails to address
the only appealable issue. See id. The motion is DENIED.
Redlich’s appeal is without arguable merit and is frivolous.
See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because
the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; ALL OUTSTANDING MOTIONS ARE
DENIED.