Bollinger

MEMORANDUM **

Laurie Bollinger appeals from a grant of summary judgment to two University of Nevada, Reno employees and the University and Community College System of Nevada. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

I

The district court properly entered summary judgment on Bollinger’s conspiracy claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985 (2). That section prohibits “two or more persons ... [from] conspir[ing] to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or •witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully.” However, “Allegations of witness intimidation under *614 § 1985(2) will not suffice for a cause of action unless it can be shown the litigant was hampered in being able to present an effective case.” David v. United States, 820 F.2d 1038, 1040 (9th Cir.1987); see also Blankenship v. McDonald, 176 F.3d 1192, 1196 (9th Cir.1999). The district court correctly concluded that because Bollinger was not a party to a case in which she seeks to testify, she cannot sustain a claim based on that case…