Ralph Merten v. City of Los Angeles

5 F.3d 538 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ralph MERTEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-56558. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 11, 1993. * Decided Aug. 25, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CV-92-03732-KN(GH, David V. Kenyon, District Judge, Presiding. C.D.Cal. DISMISSED Before: PREGERSON, BRUNETTI and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ralph Merten appeals pro se the district court's dismissal with prejudice of his action pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 621 et seq., and pendent state law claims against the City of Los Angeles (City). The government argues that, because Merten moved to voluntarily dismiss his action with prejudice, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We agree and dismiss the appeal. 3 Merten contends the district court erred by dismissing his original…