
USCA1 Opinion

	




          August 11, 1993                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 93-1634                                GEORGE K. RAUH, ETC.,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                                ROBERT DANIELS, ETC.,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE                    [Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Cyr, Boudin and Stahl,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            George K. Rauh on brief pro se.            ______________            John C. Boeckeler  and Roussos, Hage &  Hodes on Memorandum of Law            _________________      ______________________        in Support of Motion for Summary Dismissal of Appeal, for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  The judgment of dismissal is  affirmed                      __________            substantially for the reasons stated by the magistrate  judge            and district court.                      Affirmed.                      ________
