Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Moore v. U.S. Attorney General

Moore v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 951 F.2d 1200 (10th Cir. 1991)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1991-12-30
Topic: bankruptcy

McKAY, Circuit Judge. After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This matter is before the court on Appellant’s motion to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Moore v. U.S. Attorney General. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 1 opinion

MOORE v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,951 F.2d 1200(10th Cir. 1991)

LEE ALPHONSO MOORE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL; J.

MICHAEL QUINLAN, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF PRISONS; K.W. HAWK, ASST. DIRECTOR,

CENTRAL OFFICE; SAM CALBORNE, ASST. REGIONAL DIRECTOR, NORTH CENTRAL

REGIONAL OFFICE; T. LEE CONNER, ASSOC. WARDEN, UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY

LEAVENWORTH, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

No. 91-3085.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

December 30, 1991.

Lee Alphonso Moore, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas; Richard D. Rogers, J. (D.C. No. 90-3136-R).

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR and EBEL, Circuit Judges.

McKAY, Circuit Judge.

[1] After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.SeeFed.R.App.P.34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

[2] This matter is before the court on Appellant's motion to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees. We grant Appellant's motion and proceed to the merits of the case.See28 U.S.C. § 1915(a);Coppedge v. United States,369 U.S. 438,82 S.Ct. 917,8 L.Ed.2d 21(1962);Ragan v. Cox,305 F.2d 58(10th Cir. 1962).

[3] Appellant challenges the district court's dismissal of his claim that Appellees have violated his constitutional rights by refusing to change his race classification in Bureau of Prison Records from "Black" to "African American." We AFFIRM the district court's disposition, found at737 F. Supp. 1186(D.Kan. 1990), and hold that no constitutional issue has been raised.

[4] AFFIRMED.Page 1558