Lopez v. Commonwealth Oil ( 1994 )

USCA1 Opinion

          June 28, 1994
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________


        No. 93-2093 

                                   JUAN DIAZ LOPEZ,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                   COMMONWEALTH OIL REFINING COMPANY, INC., ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.


                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO


                   [Hon. Gilberto Gierbolini, U.S. District Judge]
                                              ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                  Cyr, Circuit Judge,
                                       _____________
                            Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                    ____________________
                                Stahl, Circuit Judge.
                                       _____________

                                 ____________________

            Juan Diaz Lopez on brief pro se.
            _______________
            Ricardo  F. Casellas,  Fiddler, Gonzalez  & Rodriguez  and  Arturo
            ____________________   ______________________________       ______
        Bauermeister on brief for appellees.
        ____________


                                 ____________________


                                 ____________________














                      Per Curiam.   The judgment of the district court is
                      __________

            affirmed  for  the reasons  stated  in  the district  court's
            ________

            August 24, 1993 opinion and order.

                      Appellant's motion  that this court  reconsider its

            order allowing the filing of appellees' supplemental appendix

            is denied.  
               ______

                      Appellees'  request  that   sanctions  be   awarded

            against appellant pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38 is denied.
                                                                ______