IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-50038
(Summary Calendar)
ALBERT F. PERALTA,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
LLOYD BENTSON; INTERNAL
REVENUE SERVICE; DEPARTMENT
OF THE TREASURY,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(A-95-CV-747)
April 17, 1996
Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Proceeding pro se,Plaintiff-Appellant Albert F. Peralta sought
to assert employment discrimination claims against Defendants-
Appellees. The magistrate judge to whom the case was referred by
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
the district court recommended granting Peralta’s motion to proceed
in former pauperis (IFP), denying Peralta’s motion for appointment
of counsel, and dismissing all claims with prejudice. Over the
objections of Peralta, the district court approved the report of
the magistrate judge and the recommendations set forth therein, and
dismissed Peralta’s claims as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(d) with prejudice. Peralta timely appealed.
We have reviewed the record and the document filed with this
court by Peralta which, we assume, purports to be an appellate
brief. That filing fails entirely to comply in either form or
substance with the requirements for a brief to this court and is
thus insufficient to support appellate review. Moreover, our
review of that document and the scant but sufficient record in
these proceedings demonstrates beyond cavil that Peralta presented
nothing to the district court that, no matter how liberally
construed, could form the basis for a claim with any arguable basis
in fact or law, or any likelihood of success. Consequently,
Peralta’s appeal is dismissed with prejudice as wholly without
merit and frivolous as a matter of law. Moreover, Peralta is
cautioned that any further efforts on his part to pursue the
subject matter of this case in any federal court within this
circuit may subject him to sanctions.
DISMISSED.
2