Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc.

Fourth Circuit

Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc.

613 F. App'x 243

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 25, 2015·No. No. 14-2359·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Nashibkuma Patel appeals the district court’s order dismissing his amended complaint against 7-Eleven, Inc., and denying his oral motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 15(a). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-00664-GBL-TRJ (E.D.Va. Nov. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal con[244] tentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Nashibkuma Patel appeals the district court’s order dismissing his amended complaint against 7-Eleven, Inc., and denying his oral motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), 15(a). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-00664-GBL-TRJ (E.D.Va. Nov. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal con[244] tentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 613 F. App'x 243 (4th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

613 F. App'x 243 (Patel v. 7-Eleven, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.