Peabody
Peabody v. United States
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
David Peabody appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of the amended complaint and entry of a vexatious litigant order. We review the dismissal de novo and the vexatious litigant order for abuse of discretion. See Maldonado v. Harris, 370 F.3d 945, 949 (9th Cir.2004); De Long v. Hennessey, 912 F.2d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.1990).
On October 17, 2007, Peabody filed a response to the order to show cause in appeal No. 07-15692. On November 8, 2007, Peabody filed a notice in appeal No. 07-15692. Because these filings also apply to consolidated appeal No. 07-16468, the Clerk shall file the response to the order to show cause and the notice in the consolidated appeal.
We have reviewed the record, the opening brief, and the response to the court’s order to show cause. Summary affirmance is appropriate because the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to require further argument. See United States v. Hooton, *562 698 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir.1982) (per curiam) (stating standard).
The district court properly dismissed the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction to the extent Peabody’s action amounted to a “forbidden de facto appeal”…