Rudy Young v. Bank One, N.a.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-31153
RUDY YOUNG,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
BANK ONE, N.A.,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
No. 2:04-CV-772
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
We have reviewed the briefs and applicable law and have consulted pertin-
ent portions of the record and have heard oral argument from counsel. The re-
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
November 12, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 06-31153
2
sult on appeal turns on the standard of review, which is whether the district
court abused its discretion in striking plaintiff’s tardy response to the motion for
summary judgment.
In part because of the numerous delays occasioned by plaintiff in the
course of this litigation, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its con-
siderable discretion. We make this decision irrespective of what ruling we might
make if reviewing the district court’s action de novo. It is, however, an unfortu-
nate result, given that it follows from the inadvertent mistake of counsel.
We are without jurisdiction on appeal to rule on the award of costs to the
bank. The record contains no ruling on costs, nor does the notice of appeal men-
tion it.
The summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --