Rudy G. Stanko v. State of Montana James Webber Clyde R. Husby Rob Tierney

39 F.3d 1188 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Rudy G. STANKO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE OF MONTANA; James Webber; Clyde R. Husby; Rob Tierney, Defendants-Appellees, No. 93-35948. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 7, 1994. * Decided Oct. 31, 1994. Before: LAY, ** TROTT and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM *** 2 Rudy Stanko appeals, pro se, the dismissal of his complaint alleging that the Montana Livestock Marketing Act ("the Act") is unconstitutional. In particular, Stanko claims the licensing requirements and inspection provisions of the Act as written and enforced: 1) exceed Montana's police power; 2) deny him the equal protection of the law; 3) authorize searches and seizures that are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment; 4) prevent him from working in his chosen profession; 5) impair his contractual obligations in violation of the Contracts Clause; and 6) unduly burden interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce…