Broemer v. C.I.A.

Full title: Glen BROEMER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; et…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 17, 2002

33 F. App'x 341 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

33 Fed.Appx. 341 (9th Cir. 2002) Glen BROEMER, Plaintiff--Appellant, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; et al., Defendants--Appellees. No. 01-55662. D.C. No. CV-01-01629-TJH. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. April 17, 2002

Submitted April 8, 2002 ^*.

* Because we unanimously find this case suitable for decision without oral argument, we deny Broemer's request for oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Terry J. Hatter, Jr., Chief District Judge, Presiding.

Before BROWNING, KLEINFELD and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Glen Broemer appeals pro se the district court's order denying him permission to file his complaint in forma pauperis. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for abuse of discretion a district court's denial of leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See Minetti v. Port of Seattle, 152 F.3d 1113, 1115 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Broemer's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis because Broemer failed to answer all of the questions in his "Declaration in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis." See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); see United States

Page 342.

v. McQuade, 647 F.2d 938, 940 (9th Cir.1981) (per curiam).

Broemer's remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED.