Rosner v. Fader

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: October 8, 2009
• Docket: 09-1857
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-1857

MICHAEL ROSNER,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

JUDGE JOHN FADER, II, Individually and in his Official Capacity; STATE OF MARYLAND; CHIEF JUDGE ROBERT BELL; JOHN G. TURNBELL; GORDON, FEINBLATT, R,H, & H, LLC, Res. Agent Herbert Goldman; WILLIAM C. MULFORD, II; STATE OF MARYLAND- MARTIN O’MALLEY; JUDGE PAMELA LEE NORTH; SHEILA K. SACHS, Gordon, Feinblatt, R,H, & H, LLC; HERBERT GOLDMAN, Gordon, Feinblatt, R,H, & H, LLC,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:09-cv-01923-RDB)

Submitted: September 24, 2009 Decided: October 8, 2009

Before MOTZ, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Rosner, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Michael Rosner appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his civil action for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues

raised in the Appellant’s Brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), and

Rosner’s brief asserts no argument pertaining to the dispositive

issues identified by the district court. In any event, we

conclude the district court’s decision was free of error.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Further, we

deny Rosner’s motion to remove his state court action to the

United States District Court for the District of Maryland. 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