Meeks v. Huber

976 F.2d 737 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Michael C. MEEKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Harold HUBER, individually, not in his official capacity; George Robinson, individually, not in his official capacity; Sue Wright; Wanda Keefer; Whirlpool Company Corporation; Alexis Risk Management Corporation, et al.; Dan Lundgren; Michael R. Capizzi, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-56432. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 15, 1992. * Decided Sept. 22, 1992. Before GOODWIN, D.W. NELSON and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Michael Meeks appeals pro se the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his civil rights action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review for an abuse of discretion. Denton v. Hernandez, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 1734 (1992). We vacate and remand. 3 We construe the district court's dismissal of Meeks's complaint prior to service of process as a dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (d). See…