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                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]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-