Damascus D.D.S. v. Five Unknown Named Agents for U.S. Attorney Generals Office

892 F.2d 1045 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Alexander DAMASCUS, D.D.S., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FIVE UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS FOR U.S. ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE; Delta Dental Plan of California, Inc.; Patty Borgia; Sixty Unknown Named Highway Patrol Men; Rodney Stein; Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office; Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department; George Deukmejian; Pacific Bell; Wells Fargo Bank; American Telephone and Telegraph; Nicholos Murotsume; 1000 Unknown Agents of Department of Health Services and the Board of Dental Examiners of the State of California, George Sutliff; Russel Seja; PMI, Inc.; The Director of the Board of Dental Examiners of the State of California; Lawrence Puccinelli; Leo Himmlesback; San Jose Police; Bruce Peterson; John Van De Camp; Nancy Hasse; Vivian Ramsey; Spencer R. Quin; Jeffry Janoff; Fifty Unknown Named Agents of Thousand Unknown Named Agents of the Department of Health and Human Services; the FBI; and the DEA, Ad…