
USCA1 Opinion

	




          December 21, 1995                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 95-1504                                    IDALIA MORALES,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                              UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                 Defendant, Appellee.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO                    [Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]                                             ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Selya, Stahl and Lynch,                                   Circuit Judges.                                   ______________                                 ____________________            Idalia Morales on brief pro se.            ______________            Guillermo Gil,  United States Attorney,  and Maria Hortensia  Rios            _____________                                _____________________        Gandara, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.        _______                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.    Reviewing de  novo the dismissal  of                      __________               __  ____            plaintiff's  complaint for failure to state a claim, and upon            consideration of the parties' briefs and the record, we agree            with the district  court's analysis and  affirm substantially            for the reasons set forth in its memorandum order of February            15, 1995.                      Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.                      ________   ___
