| Keyword | Case | Docket | Date: Filed / Added | 
(10906 bytes) 
(7070 bytes)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
ORDER AND JUDGMENT(*)
Before PORFILIO, KELLY and HENRY, Circuit Judges.(**)
Mr. Nollmeyer, appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, appeals from the district court's dismissal with prejudice of his civil
rights action against the United States for failure to state a claim, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), and against the Delaware State
Police for lack of personal jurisdiction, Fed. R. Civ. 12(b)(2). We construe Mr. Nollmeyer's docketing statement filed in
this court on September 23, 1997, as the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal from the district court's order of April
14, 1997 dismissing the action and the September 2, 1997 denial of post-judgment motions.
See Smith v. Barry,
502 U.S. 244, 248-49 (1992); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1); 4(a)(4)(C). We have reviewed the record and affirm for substantially
the same reasons relied upon by the magistrate judge, although we remand for the district court to enter judgment dismissing
without prejudice the claims against the Delaware State Police, as these claims were dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
See Madara v. Hall, 916 F.2d 1510, 1514 n. 1 (11th Cir. 1990). To the extent Mr. Nollmeyer raises new issues
in his appeal not addressed below, we deem them waived and do not address them.
See Sac & Fox Nation v. Hanson,
47 F.3d 1061, 1063 (10th Cir.),
cert. denied, 516 U.S. 810 (1995). We construe Mr. Nollmeyer's continued filings with
this court as motions to file supplemental briefs and deny them.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
Entered for the Court
PER CURIAM
FOOTNOTES
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
*. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral
estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be
cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
**. After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argument
would not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9.
The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
| Keyword | Case | Docket | Date: Filed / Added | (10906 bytes) (7070 bytes)
Comments to: WebMaster, ca10@law.wuacc.edu.
Updated: July 31, 1998.
HTML markup Copyright © 1998, Washburn University School of Law.
URL:
http://lawdns.wuacc.edu/ca10/cases/1998/07/97-2306.htm.
