
USCA1 Opinion

	




        September 12, 1996      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-1583                                RICHARD A. COLE, M.D.,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                               THOMAS WITTMAN, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.                                           ______________                                 ____________________            Richard A. Cole, M.D. F.A.C.P. on brief pro se.            ______________________________            Jennifer L. Johnston and  Quinn, Buseck, Leemhuis, Toohey & Kroto,            ____________________      ________________________________________        Inc.  on brief for appellees Thomas Wittmann, M.D., Vinod Patel, M.D.,        ____        Edward Overfield, M.D.,  Chest Diseases of  Northwestern Pennsylvania,        Saint Vincent Health  Center and Saint  Vincent Foundation for  Health        and Human Services.            Daniel J.  Pastore and  The McDonald  Group, L.L.P.  on brief  for            __________________      ___________________________        appellees  John  T. Schaaf,  M.D.,  Hamot  Medical  Center  and  Hamot        Healthcare Corp.            Jeffrey R.  Cohen, Wayne, Lazares  & Chappell, W. Patrick Delaney,            _________________  __________________________  __________________        Dale Huntley  and MacDonald, Illig, Jones  & Britton LLP  on brief for        ____________      ______________________________________        appellees MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton LLP.            Jeffrey R.  Cohen  and Wayne,  Lazares  &  Chappell on  brief  for            _________________      ____________________________        appellee Millcreek Community Hospital.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                 Per Curiam.  For the purposes of this appeal, we assume,                 __________            without deciding,  that we have jurisdiction  to consider the            merits of the order dismissing appellant's complaint.  In any            case, upon careful review of the record and appellate briefs,            it clearly appears that  no substantial question is presented            here and that no reversal is warranted.                 Because appellant made no  showing that a transfer would            be  in the interest of justice, we conclude that the district            court did not abuse  its discretion in failing to  order one.            See Cote v. Wadel,  796 F.2d 981, 984 (7th  Cir. 1986); Dubin            ___ ____    _____                                       _____            v. United  States, 380 F.2d 813,  816 (5th Cir. 1967)  (it is               ______________            not in the interest of justice  to use 28 U.S.C.   1406(a) to            "aid a  non-diligent plaintiff who knowingly files  a case in            the  wrong  district"); see  also  Mulcahy  v. Guertler,  416                                    _________  _______     ________            F.Supp. 1083, 1086 (D. Mass. 1976).                 Appellant's  remaining arguments also are without merit.            He never sought leave to  amend his complaint, and  amendment            would  not cure  the defects  which supported  the dismissal.            Further,  there  is  no  legal  or factual  support  for  his            assertion of judicial bias.                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.                 ________   ___                                         -2-
