
USCA1 Opinion

	




          April 10, 1996                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 95-2173                                   MICHAEL J. DEE,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                           JANET RENO, Attorney General and               ANDREW KETTERER, Attorney General of the State of Maine,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                 Selya, Cyr and Lynch,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            Michael J. Dee on brief pro se.            ______________            Jay  P. McCloskey,  United  States  Attorney,  and Evan  J.  Roth,            _________________                                  ______________        Assistant U.S. Attorney on brief for appellee, Attorney General Reno.            Andrew  Ketterer,  Attorney   General,  James  D.   Williams  III,            ________________                        _________________________        Assistant Attorney  General, and  Thomas D. Warren,  Chief, Litigation                                          ________________        Division, Assistant  Attorney General,  on brief for  appellee, Andrew        Ketterer.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per  Curiam.     Plaintiff/appellant  Michael   Dee                      ___________            challenges  a  district court  discretionary decision  not to            entertain a  declaratory judgment  action.  We  have reviewed            the parties' briefs and  the record on appeal and  affirm the            judgment essentially  for the reasons stated  by the district            court in its order dated September 11, 1995.                      Affirmed.                      _________                                         -3-
