Jaffe v. Goodwin

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1136

ALLEN V. JAFFE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LISA SPICKLER GOODWIN; JOHN R. WALK, Attorney; HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG, COX AND ALLEN, P.C.; VIRGINIA PHOTOTHERAPY, L.L.C.; RONALD MARK LANDESS, Dr., DPM, a/k/a Ronald Mark Landess; CATHERINE HAMMOND, Judge,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-03-799-3)

Submitted: June 30, 2005 Decided: July 27, 2005

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Allen V. Jaffe, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Emery Draim, David Drake Hudgins, HUDGINS LAW FIRM, Alexandria, Virginia, Charles Frederick Witthoefft, HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, Richmond, Virginia, James Walter Hopper, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Allen V. Jaffe appeals the district court’s order

imposing sanctions in the form of attorneys’ fees and costs. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Jaffe v. Goodwin, No. CA-03-799-3 (E.D. Va. Dec. 14,

2004). We deny the Hirschler Defendants’ motion for Fed. R. App.

P. 38 sanctions. 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

- 3 -