Daniel R. De Nardo v. Municipality of Anchorage Chester Chiara

974 F.2d 1341 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Daniel R. De NARDO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE, et al.; Chester Chiara, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-36177. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 21, 1992. * Decided Aug. 31, 1992. Before HUG, D.W. NELSON and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 In this civil rights case, appellant Daniel De Nardo appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to the Municipality of Anchorage and the dismissal of De Nardo's claims against State of Alaska officials. De Nardo also challenges the district court's denial of his motion to compel the production of the correction officials' personnel records. 3 The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , and we have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. 4 We review a district court's grant of summary judgment de novo to determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most…