Arora v. Inderneel

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: May 24, 2005
• Docket: 05-1018
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1018

VASU D. ARORA, M.D.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SAHAI INDERNEEL; BUCHANAN GENERAL HOSPITAL; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

H. A. STREET,

Party in Interest.

No. 05-1019

MANSOOR HYDER; APPALACHIAN REGIONAL HOSPITAL; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

and H. A. STREET,

No. 05-1020

ABU S. MATIN, M.D.; DOES 1 THROUGH 25; JOHN DOE,

05-1021

KAMRAN FASIH, M.D.; APPALACHIAN REGIONAL HOSPITAL; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

Defendants - Appellees, and

- 2 - H. A. STREET,

No. 05-1022

AMJAD HUSAIN, M.D.; BUCHANAN GENERAL HOSPITAL; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

No. 05-1023

JOSE A. ALEMPARTE, M.D.; BUCHANAN GENERAL HOSPITAL; M. J. THAKKER; TRI STATE CLINIC; SPARKS MEDICAL CENTER; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

- 3 - H. A. STREET,

No. 05-1024

RANA TABASSUM, M.D.; APPALACHIAN REGIONAL HOSPITAL; DOES 1 THROUGH 25,

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-30-1; CA-04-31-1; CA-04-32-1; CA-04-33-1; CA-04-34- 1; CA-04-35-1; CA-04-36-1)

Submitted: May 19, 2005 Decided: May 24, 2005

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vasu D. Arora, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Ralph Scott, Jr., STREET, STREET, STREET, SCOTT & BOWMAN, Grundy, Virginia; William Morris Moffett, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abington, Virginia; Kimberly W.

- 4 - Daniel, HANCOCK, DANIEL, JOHNSON & NAGLE, PC, Glen Allen, Virginia; Robert Brooks Altizer, GILLESPIE, HART, ALTIZER & WHITESELL, Tazewell, Virginia; Bryan Grimes Williams Creasy, JOHNSON, AYERS & MATTHEWS, PLC, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 5 - PER CURIAM:

In these seven appeals, Vasu D. Arora appeals from the

district court's orders dismissing his actions in which he asserted

claims for breach of contract and tortious interference with a

contract and enjoining him from filing further actions in the

district court pro se without prior permission from the court. We

have reviewed the records and find no reversible error and no abuse

of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. Arora v. Inderneel, No. CA-04-30-1 (W.D. Va.

Nov. 24, 2004); Arora v. Hyder, No. CA-04-31-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24,

2004); Arora v. Matin, No. CA-04-32-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2004);

Arora v. Fasih, No. CA-04-33-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2004); Arora v.

Husain, No. CA-04-34-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2004); Arora v.

Alemparte, No. CA-04-35-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2004); Arora v.

Tabassum, No. CA-04-36-1 (W.D. Va. Nov. 24, 2004); see In re March,

988 F.2d 498, 500 (4th Cir. 1993). 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

- 6 -