PER CURIAM.
Philip Brady appeals, pro se, the summary judgment dismissal of his action against Randall Gelino. Brady contends that Gelino’s defense to the action is nullified because he was improperly represented by government attorneys. However, neither Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 105 S.Ct. 3099, 87 L.Ed.2d 114 (1985), nor 28 C.F.R. § 50.15 bar government representation of government employees sued in their individual capacity. “We doubt in any event that the rules regarding representation by the government of its employees are intended for the protection of opposing litigants....” Bontkowski v. Smith, 305 F.3d 757, 760 (7th Cir.2002).
AFFIRMED
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.