Richardson v. Fed Bur of Investg

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-30055
Conference Calendar
MACK HENRY RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 03-CV-743
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Mack Henry Richardson appeals from the district court’s
dismissal, on grounds of res judicata, of his action against the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Richardson argues that
his 1973 conviction does not prohibit him from owning a firearm
and that he has a cause of action against the FBI under 5 U.S.C.
§ 552a(g)(1). Richardson also argues that the district court
should have admitted his “penitentiary packet” into evidence.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
June 23, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 04-30055
-2-
Richardson’s brief contains no argument that the district
court erred in dismissing his action as barred by the doctrine of
res judicata. “Failure to provide any legal or factual analysis
of an issue results in waiver.” American States Ins. Co. v.
Bailey, 133 F.3d 363, 372 (5th Cir. 1998). Although this court
liberally construes briefs of pro se litigants under Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972), pro se parties must still
brief their issues. See Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524
(5th Cir. 1995).
Because Richardson has failed to argue the only issue
arguably on appeal, the appeal is frivolous and must be DISMISSED
as such. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Richardson is WARNED that the
filing of future frivolous appeals may result in sanctions.
APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTIONS WARNING ISSUED.

-- 2 of 2 --