Amr v. Moore

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: February 16, 2011
• Docket: 10-2041
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-2041

SALAME M. AMR,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

EDDIE N. MOORE, JR.; LARRY C. BROWN; KEITH M. WILLIAMSON; NASSER RASHIDI; GERALD BURTON; DONNA CRAWFORD; GLORIA YOUNG; ALI MOHAMED; OLIVER W. HILL, JR.; WONDI MERSIE; ANDREW KANU; STEPHAN WILDEUS; SHARON EVANS; AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION; AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS; VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF VISITORS, THE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:09-cv-00667-REP)

Submitted: February 10, 2011 Decided: February 16, 2011

Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Salame M. Amr, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Clayton Fleming, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Margaret Sander, THOMPSON MCMULLAN PC, Richmond, Virginia; Jeremy David Capps, HARMAN, CLAYTOR, CORRIGAN & WELLMAN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Salame M. Amr appeals the district court’s orders,

both entered on August 9, 2009, adopting the magistrate judge’s

recommendations and dismissing his complaint, and denying Amr’s

subsequent motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. Amr v. Moore, No.

3:09-cv-00667-REP (E.D. Va. Aug. 9, 2010). We deny Amr’s

motions to supplement, for default judgment, for subpoenas, and

for reconsideration and relief. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED