[NOT FOR PUBLICATION–NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 99-2074

JOSEPH J. FIUMARA,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

MARY C. MARSHALL (formerly Mary C. Fiumara); ROBERT TOWLER; ALAN ROACH, MICHAEL C. MCCARTHY,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

[Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge] [Hon. James R. Muirhead, U.S. Magistrate Judge]

Before

Selya, Circuit Judge, Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge, and Boudin, Circuit Judge.

Joseph J. Fiumara on brief pro se. Joseph K. Bosen and Watson & Bosen, P.A. on Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Summary Affirmance for appellee Mary C. Marshall. William G. Scott and Boynton, Waldron, Doleac, Woodman & Scott, P.A. on brief for appellees Robert Towler and Alan Roach. Peter G. Beeson, John P. Sherman and Devin, Millimet & Branch on brief for appellee Michael C. McCarthy. SEPTEMBER 28, 2000 Per Curiam. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment

dismissing his claims against one of the defendants for

failure

to state a claim, and, following discovery, entering summary

judgment in favor of the other defendants. Plaintiff's

brief does not contain sufficiently developed argumentation

in support of his claims of legal error, so we deem the

issues waived. Upon de novo review of the judgment in light

of the arguments on appeal which we understand, and in light

of the appendix materials, we see no error. The court

followed the correct procedure by liberally construing

plaintiff's pro se pleadings and indulging all reasonable

inferences in his favor. We glimpse no genuine issue of

material fact which required further proceedings. We see no

error in the denial of plaintiff's motions for additional

discovery nor in the denial of his several motions seeking

to re-join as a party the defendant dismissed from the case

for a failure to state a claim.1

Affirmed.

1We note, moreover, that even if Attorney McCarthy had been rejoined he, like the other defendants, would have been entitled to summary judgment.