HANA HILSENRATH and OLIVER HILSENRATH v. CREDIT SUISSE (CS) and UNITED BANK OF SWITZERLAND (UBS)

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HANA HILSENRATH and OLIVER
HILSENRATH,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
CREDIT SUISSE (CS) and UNITED
BANK OF SWITZERLAND (UBS),
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 08-15230
D.C. No. CV-07-05374-WHA
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Hana Hilsenrath and Oliver Hilsenrath appeal pro se the district court’s
dismissal of their action against Credit Suisse and the United Bank of Switzerland
FILED
NOV 02 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-15230 -2-
alleging that the banks failed to warn them through a product-warning label that
the banks would not comply with the United States Constitution and its provisions
to protect the constitutional right to property. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291. Our review is de novo, Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d
1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 2004), and we affirm for the reasons stated in the district
court’s Order filed on January 10, 2008.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --