Bates v. Federal Reserve Bank

Fourth Circuit

Bates v. Federal Reserve Bank

615 F. App'x 126

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 31, 2015·No. Nos. 15-1610, 15-1611, 15-1612, 15-1613, 15-1614, 15-1615, 15-1616·Published

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Hephzibah Bates appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her complaints in her consolidated civil suits as frivolous and entering a prefiling injunction preventing Bates from filing further complaints related to the issues raised in the instant complaints. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bates v. Fed. Reserve Bank of Richmond, 3:14-cv-00320-REP (E.D.Va. May 15, 2015); see [127] also Cromer v. Kraft Foods N. Amer., Inc., 390 F.3d 812, 817 (4th Cir.2004) (setting forth standard of review of prefiling injunction). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this eourt and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

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

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Hephzibah Bates appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her complaints in her consolidated civil suits as frivolous and entering a prefiling injunction preventing Bates from filing further complaints related to the issues raised in the instant complaints. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeals for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bates v. Fed. Reserve Bank of Richmond, 3:14-cv-00320-REP (E.D.Va. May 15, 2015); see [127] also Cromer v. Kraft Foods N. Amer., Inc., 390 F.3d 812, 817 (4th Cir.2004) (setting forth standard of review of prefiling injunction). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this eourt and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.

Bates v. Federal Reserve Bank, 615 F. App'x 126 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

615 F. App'x 126 (Bates v. Federal Reserve Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.