USCA1 Opinion

      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 98-1745



                         ALTHEA GARRISON,



                      Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                v.



      NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, ET AL.,



                      Defendants, Appellees.







           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS



           [Hon. Richard Stearns, U.S. District Judge]







                              Before



                     Torruella, Chief Judge,

                Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,

                   and Lipez, Circuit Judge.

                                

                                





     Althea Garrison on brief pro se.

     Joseph G. Donnellan on brief for appellees.











April 2, 1999







                                

                                

                                        

            Per Curiam.  Althea Garrison appeals pro se from a

    district court order dismissing her complaint against a union

    and various union officials.  Having carefully reviewed the

    briefs and record, we affirm essentially for the reasons stated

    by the district court.  We add that a litigant cannot make an

    end-run around the six-month limitation period by repackaging

    a hybrid  301/fair representation suit under the Labor

    Management Relations Act ("LMRA") as a claim under the Labor-

    Management Reporting and Disclosure Act ("LMRDA").  See Linnanev. General Elec. Co., 948 F.2d 69, 73 (1st Cir. 1991).

    Accordingly, even if we assume for the sake of argument that

    Garrison's amended complaint states a claim under the LMRDA, it

    is time-barred.  Finally, Garrison's contention that the

    district judge should have recused himself, made for the first

    time in her reply brief, is waived based on her failure to

    raise the issue in the district court.  See In re Abijoe Realty

    Corp., 943 F.2d 121, 127 (1st Cir. 1991).  In any event, her

    suggestion of a conflict of interest is entirely speculative.

            Affirmed.