Thomas Eugene Moore v. James Gomez George Ingle

94 F.3d 652 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Thomas Eugene MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James GOMEZ; George Ingle, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-16924. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 16, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 California state prisoner Thomas E. Moore appeals pro se the district court dismissal as frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action against case records specialists Anne Otter, Lisa Hoffman, and Connie Henderson. 1 Moore alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights by negligently performing their duties of informing the state sentencing court of an error in its abstract of judgment. Moore claims that his parole release date was incorrectly calculated based upon this error, and that he served an additional sixteen months in prison as a result. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We…