IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40713
Summary Calendar
__________________
WILLIE CRAWFORD BENNETT,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JAMES A. COLLINS, DIRECTOR, TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; WAYNE SCOTT;
J. ZELLER; J. FENNIMORE,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-95-CV-145
- - - - - - - - - -
January 30, 1996
Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
William Crawford Bennett appeals from the district court's
order denying his request for a preliminary injunction. Bennett
requested, among other relief, that the district court grant him
a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction
restraining prison officials from retaliating against him or
transferring him during the pendency of the suit.
The record indicates that Bennett has been transferred;
nevertheless, Bennett does not mention any injury resulting from
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-40713
-2-
the transfer in his appeal. Accordingly, that issue has been
waived. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813
F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987) (issues which are not briefed are
waived). Bennett's other issues concern incidents or conditions
on the Chase Field West Unit. As Bennett has been moved from
that unit without objection, those issues are moot. See Powell
v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969) ("Simply stated, a case is
moot when the issues presented are no longer `live' or the
parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.").
Because the issue is moot, the appeal is frivolous and is
DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
Bennett has not shown that he requires the appointment of
counsel on appeal; therefore, his motion for appointment of
counsel is DENIED. Bennett's request for publication is also
DENIED, as his case does not meet the criteria for publication.
Bennett is cautioned that any additional frivolous appeals
filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid
sanctions, Bennett is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous because they have been previously decided by this
court.
APPEAL DISMISSED.