United States v. Thomas L. Carufel

101 F.3d 706 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas L. CARUFEL, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-56281. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 5, 1996. * Decided Nov. 13, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thomas L. Carufel appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment and denial of his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(a)(2) motion for a new trial. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court's grant of summary judgment. Warren v. City of Carlsbad, 58 F.3d 439, 441 (9th Cir.1995). We review a district court's denial of a motion for a new trial for abuse of discretion. California Sansome Co. v. United States Gypsum, 55 F.3d 1402, 1405 (9th Cir.1995). We affirm. 3 After a review of the district court record, we agree with the district court that Carufel failed to present evidence at summary judgment to…