Bahram Shakeri v. Jeremy Allen

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 2, 2026
Docket25-1209
StatusUnpublished

This text of Bahram Shakeri v. Jeremy Allen (Bahram Shakeri v. Jeremy Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bahram Shakeri v. Jeremy Allen, (4th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 25-1209 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/02/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-1209

BAHRAM SHAKERI,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JEREMY ALLEN,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Lydia Kay Griggsby, District Judge. (8:21-cv-00549-LKG)

Submitted: February 26, 2026 Decided: March 2, 2026

Before NIEMEYER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Asim AR Ghafoor, GILL LAW FIRM, Dulles, Virginia, for Appellant. Shelley L. Johnson, Acting County Attorney, Andrew J. Murray, PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Largo, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1209 Doc: 16 Filed: 03/02/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Bahram Shakeri appeals the district court’s order granting Defendant’s Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12(b)(6) motion and dismissing his second amended civil action. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. * Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order.

Shakeri v. Allen, No. 8:21-cv-00549-LKG (D. Md. Jan. 31, 2025). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* For the first time on appeal, Shakeri argues that the district court should have afforded him time to gather additional information about Defendant. Because this forfeited argument is not developed or briefed in compliance with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(8)(A) and Shakeri has not addressed the requirements of plain error or asserted fundamental error or exceptional circumstances, we reject it. See Misjuns v. City of Lynchburg, 139 F.4th 378, 386 n.* (4th Cir. 2025); Milla v. Brown, 109 F.4th 222, 234 (4th Cir. 2024); United States v. Miller, 41 F.4th 302, 313 (4th Cir. 2022).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Martin Misjuns v. City of Lynchburg
139 F.4th 378 (Fourth Circuit, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bahram Shakeri v. Jeremy Allen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bahram-shakeri-v-jeremy-allen-ca4-2026.