
    Juanita MANSFIELD et al., Plaintiffs, v. Caspar W. WEINBERGER, Defendant.
    Civ. A. No. 75-365.
    United States District Court, District of Columbia.
    July 29, 1975.
    Dorothy T. Lang, Los Angeles, Cal., Arlene T. Shadoan, Washington, D. C., Philip L. Goar, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiffs.
    Peter C. Schaumber, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., for defendant.
    Before ROBB, Circuit Judge, and CORCORAN and GREEN, District Judges.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In light of the Supreme Court decision in Weinberger v. Salfi,-U.S.-, 95 S.Ct. 2457, 45 L.Ed.2d 522 (1975), and of the entire record herein, we conclude, sua sponte, that since no substantial constitutional question is presented a three-judge district court is not required to hear and determine this case under 28 U.S.C. § 2282 (1970). See Idlewild Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U.S. 713, 715, 82 S.Ct. 1294, 8 L.Ed.2d 794 (1962); Brotherhood of Locomotive Fire. & E. v. Certain Carriers, Etc., 118 U.S.App.D.C. 100, 331 F.2d 1020, cert. denied, 377 U.S. 918, 84 S.Ct. 1181, 12 L.Ed.2d 187 (1964). Accordingly, the three-judge district court heretofore convened is hereby dissolved. See Weinberger v. Salfi, supra; MTM, Inc. v. Baxley, 420 U.S. 799, 95 S.Ct. 1278, 43 L.Ed.2d 636 (1975); Gonzalez v. Automatic Employees Credit Union, 419 U.S. 90, 95 S.Ct. 289, 42 L.Ed.2d 249 (1974); Mengelkoch v. Industrial Welfare Comm’n, 393 U.S. 83, 89 S.Ct. 60, 21 L.Ed.2d 215 (1968); Wilson v. Port Lavaca, 391 U.S. 352, 88 S.Ct. 1502, 20 L.Ed.2d 636 (1968).

So ordered.  