Lee Dymits v. State Street Bank and Trust Company

89 F.3d 845 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Lee DYMITS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-17101. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 22, 1996. * Decided April 29, 1996. Before: HALL, THOMPSON and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Lee Dymits appeals pro se the district court's dismissal pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) of his diversity action against State Street Bank and Trust Company. The district judge concluded that the complaint did not meet the $50,000 amount-in-controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1332 . 3 We review de novo, Seven Resorts, Inc. v. Cantlen, 57 F.3d 771, 772 (9th Cir.1995), and affirm for the reasons stated by the district judge in his August 8, 1995 order of dismissal. 1 4 AFFIRMED. * The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4 **…