Simon Levi v. Safeway Phoenix Security Operation Michael McGraf

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Simon LEVI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAFEWAY; Phoenix Security Operation; Michael McGraf, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-16177. 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 Simon S. Levi appeals pro se the district court's order imposing sanctions following the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Safeway Stores for its alleged refusal to allow him to panhandle in front of a Safeway store located in San Francisco, California. The district court, after holding that Safeway was not a state actor, dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. A. Motion For Extension Of Time 3 Levi contends that the district court erred by failing to rule on Levi's outstanding motion for extension of time to…