Oase

103 F.3d 140 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kenneth R. OASE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TUCSON, ARIZONA; Pima County Animal Control; R. Sallee, Tucson Police Officer; Sergeant Gillogoy, Tucson Police Sergeant, Defendants, and County of Pima, Arizona; Officer Hancock, Badge 1904, Defendants-Appellees. No. 96-15986. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 2, 1996. * Decided Dec. 06, 1996. Before: SNEED, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Kenneth R. Oase appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for defendants Hancock and Pima County in Oase's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants violated the Fourth Amendment by conducting warrantless inspections of his home on July 10, 1994, and September 22, 1994, to investigate the health of his cats. The district court determined that Oase failed to demonstrate that Hancock had conducted the inspections pursuant to an unconstitutional Pima County…