
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 97-1743                            HECTOR GUZMAN-RIVERA, ET AL.,                               Plaintiffs, Appellants,                                          v.                             HECTOR RIVERA-CRUZ, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO             [Hon. Gilberto Gierbolini-Ortiz, Senior U.S. District Judge]                                              __________________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Juan  R. Requena Davila and Law Offices Alvaro R. Calderon, Jr. on            _______________________     ___________________________________        brief for appellant.            Esther  Castro  Schmidt  and  Gaztambide  &  Plaza  on  brief  for            _______________________       ____________________        appellees.                                 ____________________                                   October 14, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per  Curiam.  We  have reviewed the  briefs submitted by                 ___________            the  parties  and  the  record  on  appeal,  and  we  affirm.            Appellants  argue the  court abused  its  discretion when  it            dismissed the  action without prejudice  after being  advised            the appellants could not locate two essential witnesses.                 An  abuse  of discretion  may  not be  found  unless the            court's  error  resulted  in  substantial  prejudice  to  the            movant.   United States v.  Saccoccia, 58 F.3d 754,  770 (1st                      ___________________________            Cir. 1995).   We  see no prejudice  here, since  the district            court offered appellants  the opportunity to return  to court            if  they  were  able  to  locate  their  witnesses  within  a            reasonable amount of time.                   Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.                 ________                                         -2-
