Knights v. Stihl Inc.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-2118

MICHAEL KNIGHTS,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

STIHL INCORPORATED, (Third Party Beneficially Capacity and Individual Capacity); GUY WALLACE, (Third Party Beneficially Capacity and Individual Capacity); EARL SYKES, (Third Party Beneficially Capacity and Individual Capacity); OXFORD GLOBAL RESOURCES, (Contracting Capacity),

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:10-cv-00260-RAJ-DEM)

Submitted: March 15, 2011 Decided: March 17, 2011

Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Knights, Appellant Pro Se. Robert W. McFarland, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP , Norfolk, Virginia; Melanie Gayle Augustin, Thomas Joseph Flaherty, LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C., McLean, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Michael Knights appeals the district court’s final

order dismissing his civil complaint. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Knights v. Stihl

Inc., No. 2:10-cv-00260-RAJ-DEM (E.D. Va. Sept. 13, 2010; Aug.

5, 2010). 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