
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 97-2035                                  FAROUK O. MARTINS,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                         CHARLES HAYDEN GOODWILL INN SCHOOL,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Farouk Martins on brief pro se.            ______________            Andrew L. Matz,  Bret A. Cohen and Stoneman, Chandler & Miller LLP            ______________   _____________     _______________________________        on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                   January 28, 1998                                 ____________________                 Per  Curiam.  We  have reviewed the  parties' briefs and                 ___________            the record on appeal.   We affirm essentially for the reasons            stated  in the district  court's memoranda and  orders, dated            July 14, 1997 and July 28, 1997.                 We deny  the appellee's request  that we enter  an order            preventing appellant from further court action based upon the            same underlying  facts.   Such  a  request is  more  properly            addressed to  the district court  in the event of  any future            filing.  We  decline to  remark upon  the appropriateness  of            granting such a request and  leave it to the district court's            discretion if and when the occasion for consideration arises.                 Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.                 _________                                         -2-
