USCA1 Opinion

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________





        No. 96-2012



                                   DOMONIC SANTINI,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                        HONORABLE GILBERTO GIERBOLINI, ET AL.,



                                Defendants, Appellees.



                                 ____________________





                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO



                   [Hon. Salvador E. Casellas, U.S. District Judge]



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________

                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________



                                 ____________________



            Domonic Santini on brief pro se.
            _______________

            Guillermo Gil, United  States Attorney, Jorge E. Vega-Pacheco  and
            _____________                           _____________________

        Nelson  Perez-Sosa, Assistant  United  States Attorneys,  and Jose  A.
        __________________                                            ________

        Quilles-Espinosa, Senior Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellees.
        ________________





                                 ____________________



                                     June 4, 1997

                                 ____________________





































                      Per Curiam.   After carefully reviewing the  record
                      __________



            and  the parties' briefs, we hold that the district court did



            not  abuse  its  discretion  in  sua  sponte  dismissing  the
                                             ___  ______



            complaint of appellant Domonic Santini.  We add that  nothing



            in appellant's brief persuades us  that allowing him to amend



            the  complaint would be anything but futile.  See Shockley v.
                                                          ___ ________



            Jones,  823 F.2d 1068, 1072-73 (7th Cir. 1987).  We therefore
            _____



            affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the
            ______



            reasons  stated   in  its  Opinion  and   Order,  Santini  v.
                                                              _______



            Gierbolini, 937 F.Supp. 130 (D.P.R. 1996).
            __________



                      Affirmed.
                      ________































































                                         -2-