Don Wallace v. Enhanced Recovery Company

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2194

DON BRADLEY WALLACE,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

ENHANCED RECOVERY COMPANY, LLC,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00124-FL)

Submitted: April 28, 2016 Decided: June 21, 2016

Before NIEMEYER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Don Bradley Wallace, Appellant Pro Se. Scott Stephen Gallagher, SMITH, GAMBRELL & RUSSELL, LLP, Jacksonville, Florida, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Don Bradley Wallace appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his complaint asserting claims under the

Telephone Consumer Protect Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (2012). * We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Schatz v.

Rosenberg, 943 F.2d 485, 487 n.1 (4th Cir. 1991) (“We must

review the district court’s decision on the same record as that

before the district court.”). Accordingly, we affirm the

district court’s order, deny Wallace’s motions to supplement the

record on appeal, to seal some of those documents, and to

clarify, and deny the Appellee’s motion to strike portions of

Wallace’s opening brief. 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 in the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* Wallace abandoned in the district court the remaining claims asserted in the complaint.