In Re James Constant, Debtor. James Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc.

12 F.3d 1105 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. In re James CONSTANT, Debtor. James CONSTANT, v. ADVANCED MICRO-DEVICES, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 92-55465, 92-56220 and 92-56475. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1993. * Decided Dec. 3, 1993. Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James Constant appeals pro se the district court's orders (1) dismissing Constant's complaint, (2) enjoining Constant from filing further papers without prior court approval, (3) imposing Rule 11 sanctions against Constant, and (4) assigning Constant's patents and copyrights to the U.S. marshal to satisfy the court's judgment against Constant. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We affirm and impose sanctions against Constant for filing a frivolous appeal. 3 The history of Constant's litigation, which began in 1985 with patent infringment actions, is summarized in previous…